JOINT MEETING OF THE LVTS TECHNICAL AND COORDINATING COMMITTEES Wednesday, July 15, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. LVPC Conference Room AGENDA Roll Call Courtesy of the Floor Minutes 1. ACTION ITEM: Technical Committee approval of LVTS Technical Committee Meeting Minutes of June 3, 2020 (see page 2) 2. ACTION ITEM: Coordinating Committee approval of LVTS Coordinating Committee Meeting Minutes of June 3, 2020 (see page 2) Old Business 1. WORK PLAN ITEM: PennDOT District 5 Highway Status Report (CK) (see page 14) 2. WORK PLAN ITEM: PennDOT District 5 Transportation Improvement Program Administrative Actions (JR) (see page 18) 3. ACTION ITEM: LVTS Adoption of the 2021 – 2024 Transportation Improvement Program (see page 20) Air Quality Resolution (see page 61) Self-Certification Resolution (see page 63) Transportation Improvement Program 4. WORK PLAN ITEM: FHWA Certification Review Findings (JC,JL, BB) (see page 66) 5. WORK PLAN ITEM: MAP Forum Spring Annual Meeting (BB,CD) New Business 1. WORK PLAN ITEM: Investing in a New Vision for the Environment and Surface Transportation in America (INVEST in America) Act (BB,CD) 2. WORK PLAN ITEM: Equity Analysis Update (BB, JS, SS) Communication + Correspondence 1. Morning Call’s Road Warrior Column (see page 118) Public Engagement and Participation: 1. Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP) @ LVPC Office (BH) Virtual Class – Speed Limits and Speed Management: September 15th, 8:00 am – 12:00 pm 2. Next Committee Meetings @ LVPC LVTS Joint Technical and Coordinating Committee, August 5, 2020, CANCELLED WorkshopLV: Freight (Freight Advisory Committee), CANCELLED WorkshopLV: Multimodal (Multimodal Working Group), August 26, 2020 @ 3:00 PM
1
Lehigh Valley Transportation Study Minutes from the June 3, 2020 Joint Meeting of the LVTS Technical and Coordinating Committees DUE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD VIA WEB AND/OR CALL
Prior to the meeting being called to order, Ms. Vazquez stated that the agenda and materials for this meeting were posted on the LVPC website. She provided directions on how to participate in the virtual meeting and the protocol to allow the meeting to flow smoothly. Ms. Vazquez also mentioned that this meeting was advertised in the Morning Call on May 7, 2020, as well as the LVPC website and social media outlets. She explained the procedure for public participants to ask questions or make comments. Ms. Bradley reviewed the meeting agenda.
Mr. Kufro called the meeting to order and asked Ms. Bradley to read the roll call.
Attendees: LVTS Technical Committee: City of Allentown Leonard Lightner (alt) City of Bethlehem Darlene Heller (Alt) City of Easton Dave Hopkins (Alt) LANta Brendan Cotter LNAA Ryan Meyer LVPC Becky Bradley PennDOT Central Office James Mosca PennDOT District 5 Chris Kufro
LVTS Coordinating Committee: City of Allentown Craig Messinger (Alt) City of Easton Dave Hopkins (Alt) LANta Owen O’Neill Lehigh County Phillips Armstrong / Rick Molchany (Alt) LNAA Tom Stoudt LVPC Becky Bradley PennDOT Central Office Brian Hare PennDOT District 5 Michael Rebert
Absentee: LVTS Coordinating Committee: City of Bethlehem Northampton County
2 LVPC Staff Participants: Matt Assad Charles Doyle Carol Halper Brian Hite Simon Okumu Geoff Reese Dave Towsey Bethany Vazquez
Public Participants: Rick Ames, Carmen Bell, Jim Birdsall, Jennifer Crobak, Jay Finnegan, Marta Gabriel, Cathy Gorman, Max Inkrote, Cheryl Johnson-Watts, Fred Koeck, Amanda Leindecker, Anthony Moussa, Sherri Penchishen, Lee Rackus, Amanda Raudenbush, Debbie Roezar, Jen Ruth, Kim Schaffer and Chris Strohler
Courtesy of the Floor Mr. Kufro asked if there was any member of the public who wished to make a comment or asked a question regarding a subject not on the agenda. There were none. He reminded participants that they could ask questions in the Q&A box on their screens
Minutes Mr. Kufro stated that the minutes from the May 6, 2020 LVTS Technical Committee Meeting were in the packet and on the slides. For the Technical Committee, Ms. Bradley pointed out that the Technical Committee actions from the May 6, 2020 meeting were being shown on the screen. Mr. Kufro asked for a motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Lightner made a motion and Mr. Cotter seconded it. Mr. Kufro asked if there were any questions or comments, hearing none, he asked Ms. Bradley for an abbreviated roll call vote. The minutes were unanimously approved.
Mr. Rebert stated that the minutes from the April 1, 2020 Coordinating Committee Meeting were in the packet and on the screen. Ms. Bradley mentioned that the actions from the April 1, 2020 meeting were on the screen. Mr. Rebert asked for a motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Molchany made a motion to approve the minutes, with a second from Mr. O’Neil. Mr. Rebert asked if there were any questions or comments. Hearing none, he asked Ms. Bradley for an abbreviated roll call vote. The minutes were unanimously approved. Old Business WORK PLAN ITEM: PennDOT District 5 Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside and Multi-modal Transportation Fund Projects Status Report Mr. Kufro reviewed the list of projects from the Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside fund and mulit-modal transportation funded projects within the Lehigh Valley, the projects were included in the meeting packet and on the screen. There were no questions or comments.
3
ACTION ITEM: PennDOT District 5 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Administrative Actions and Amendments Ms. Ruth reviewed the TIP Administrative Actions in the handout and on the slides. There were no questions regarding the Administrative Actions. She then stated there were three TIP Amendments that needed to be voted on. 1- The first amendment is to add the LVTS Bridge Preservation and Repair #6 Preliminary Engineering phase to the current TIP. This is to continue PennDOT’s priority bridges to get them into construction. Construction is carried on the draft 2021 TIP. The source is the Line Item. 2- The second amendment is to add SR 4020 over a tributary to Bertsch Creek Bridge in Northampton County to the TIP, adding Preliminary Engineering, Right- of-Way and Construction. Construction is being done by the Department. Right- of-Way and Construction need to be added to the draft 2021 TIP. Preliminary Engineering would start now with funds from the Line Item. 3- The third amendment is to increase Right-of-Way for the Route 309 and Tilghman Street Interchange Reconstruction in the amount of $9,524,785.00. This increase will fully cover Right-of-Way. The sources are low bids from the Jordan Street Bridge, numerous deobligations returned to the region and the Line Item. Mr. Kufro asked if there were any questions or comments. Mr. Mosca added that Amendment #3 was contingent on approval by the Department’s Program Management Committee. Ms. Bradley stated that it appears funds are being moved from the Freeway Service Patrol, does that mean that the project will no longer be funded? Ms. Ruth answered that the Freeway Service Patrol used to be a 80 – 20 split, but it is now 100% federally funded, so they are giving us money back from the 80-20 split because we had to separate them on two different State Project Numbers, that are assigned to unique projects. Mr. Kufro asked for a motion from the Technical Committee to accept the three TIP Amendments, including Mr. Mosca’s comment. Mr. Hopkins made the motion, which was seconded by Mr. Cotter. Hearing no questions or comments from either the voting members or the public, Mr. Kufro called for the vote. Ms. Bradley read an abbreviated roll call and the motion passed unanimously. Mr. Rebert asked for a motion from the Coordinating Committee to accept the three TIP Amendments, including Mr. Mosca’s comment. Mr. Molchany made the motion, which was seconded by Mr. Messinger. Hearing no questions or comments from either the voting members or the public, Mr. Rebert called for the vote. Ms. Bradley read an abbreviated roll call and the motion passed unanimously. LANta Transportation Improvement Program Amendments Mr. Cotter reported that there were several Administration Actions in the handout, however there were two Transit TIP Modifications that had to be voted on. 1. The first modification LANta is proposing is to add $3,774,560 in federal funds into federal fiscal year (FFY) 2020 in operating assistance. 2. The second modification is under preventive maintenance. It is a decrease of $1,880,826 in Federal FY (FFY) 2019 and $1,540,000 in Federal FY 2020.
4 Those reductions in preventive maintenance were shifted into LANta operating assistance in FFY 2020. The source for operation assistance came from preventive maintenance in FFY 2019 and 2020.
Mr. Kufro asked for a motion from the Technical Committee to approve LANta’s proposed TIP amendments #1 and #2. Ms. Bradley made the motion and Ms. Heller made the second. Mr. Kufro asked for comments and questions from the members and the public. Hearing none he asked Ms. Bradley to read the abbreviated roll call. The motion carried.
Mr. Rebert asked for the same motion from the Coordinating Committee. Mr. Molchany made the motion and Mr. Stoudt seconded it. Mr. Rebert asked if there were any comments and questions from the members and the public. Hearing none he asked Ms. Bradley to read the abbreviated roll call. The motion carried.
LVTS Coordinating Committee Adoption of Walk/RollLV: Active Transportation Plan Mr. Rebert stated that the Coordinating Committee will need to vote on the adoption of the Walk/Roll; Active Transportation Plan. He asked Ms. Bradley to make some comments. She stated that the LVTS Technical and Coordinating Committees and the Multimodal Working Group, now known as WorkshopLV: Multimodal, have been working for about a year and a half to develop the region’s first pedestrian, bicycle, last feet to transit and accessibility strategy. They have also been coordinating with the LVPC’s Environment and Transportation Committees. The final draft was received by the consultants and posted to the LVPC website.
Ms. Bradley invited Mr. Reese to walk through the plan review and anticipated adoption process. Mr. Reese reviewed the timeline of the plan which included the path to adoption. Mr. Reese introduced several members of the WorkshopLV: Multimodal to discuss key elements of the plan. They are Kim Schaffer, Community Bike Works, Jim Birdsall, Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor, Cheryl Johnson-Watts, Allentown School Board and Sherri Penchishen, City of Bethlehem. Ms. Johnson-Watts talked about the purpose of WalkRollLV and the vision and goals. Ms. Penchishen stated the importance of creating a pedestrian-friendly environment throughout the Lehigh Valley. Mr. Birdsall shared the three basic types of recommendations regarding bicycling and Ms. Schaffer stated that the plan concludes with policy and program recommendations. Mr. Reese concluded that the WalkRollLV: Active Transportation Plan was adopted by the LVPC on April 30, 2020, and approved by the LVTS Technical Committee on May 6, 2020 and referred to the Coordinating Committee for adoption at this meeting.
Mr. Rebert asked for a motion to approve WalkRollLV: Active Transportation Plan. Mr. Hopkins made the motion; Mr. Molchany seconded it. Mr. Rebert asked if there were any questions or comments from the members. Mr. Molchany asked since the LVPC did the sidewalk audit, would there be an attempt to work with municipalities to close the sidewalk gap? Mr. Reese answered that the sidewalk inventory was completed in 2017. WalkRoll looked even deeper regarding the important gaps. This goal is contained in WalkRoll and FutureLV and we are looking forward to working with the municipalities. Mr. Hare asked if there will be reports to the committee regarding outcomes, successes and implementation of the plan. Ms. Bradley responded, “Definitely.” WorkshopLV:
5 Multimodal will continue to be an active committee. They are already developing concepts for events in different parts of the Lehigh Valley, including some with several non-profits. Hearing no further questions from the committee, Mr. Rebert asked if there were questions or comments from the public. Hearing none, he asked Ms. Bradley for an abbreviated roll call vote. The motion was approved unanimously. Ms. Rackus wrote in the Q&A:
I think the question should be work with the municipalities AND THE STATE to complete. There are many gaps in Whitehall that are on State Routes, and across the jughandles. I mean gaps in sidewalks, sorry needed to clarify. Also the issue of who is the permittee for the walks on state routes needs to be resolved. There is no reason for the local municipality to be a permittee for walks along private property on a state route. • Ms. Bradley responded that the plan passed and we'll get your comments in the minutes but, are you OK with me doing the following: 1) adding this to the public comment record for the TIP because they go to a broader audience and bring more awareness to the issue? 2) Taking this to the County Commissioners Association of PA/County Planning Directors Association as a request to add to their advocacy agenda? Ms. Rackus wrote that she appreciated the consideration.
WORK PLAN ITEM: Draft 2021 – 2024 Transportation Improvement Program Public Meeting Please see the attached minutes from the TIP Pubic Meeting
New Business There was no new business.
Communication + Correspondence Mr. Rebert called upon Mr. Assad to comment on the attached articles. RELEVANT NEWS: LV Business Cycle Column Mr. Assad pointed out Ms. Bradley’s column in the Morning Call from Sunday May 31, 2020. RELEVANT NEWS: The Atlantic: “America’s Next Crisis Is Already Here” Mr. Assad stated that this article details the financial toll the pandemic is taking on cities and towns. RELEVANT NEWS: Huff Post “Biking Boom” Article This article suggested by LVPC Chair, Greg Zebrowski, is about how an existing bicycle boom is being accelerated by the pandemic.
Public Engagement and Participation Ms. Vazquez reviewed the list of Public Engagement and Participation in the handout and on the slide.
Courtesy of the Floor Mr. Rebert offered an opportunity for members of the committees and the public to make additional comments. There were none.
6 Adjourn Mr. Rebert asked for a motion to adjourn. Mr. Molchany made the motion and everyone voted yes. Mr. Rebert adjourned the meeting.
Submitted by, Becky Bradley, AICP, LVTS Secretary and Carol Halper, Senior Advisor
7 Joint Technical + Coordinating Committees June 3, 2020 Meeting Voice Ballot Due to COVID-19 Pandemic Restricting In-Person Interactions*
Technical Committee Coordinating Committee Attendence Attendence Vote Vote Member Present Absent Weight Total Member Present Absent Weight Total
Chris Kufro, Chair X1Michael Rebert, Chair X1
Brendan Cotter, Vice Chair X1Brian Hare, Vice Chair X1
Becky Bradley, Secretary X3Becky Bradley, Secretary X1
Ray O'Connell (M) / Leonard Lightner (Alt) X1Ray O;Connell (M) / Craig Messinger (Alt X2
Robert Donchez (M) / Darlene Heller (Alt) X1Robert Donchez (M) / Michael Alkhal (Alt) X2
Salvatore Panto (M) / David Hopkins (Alt) X1Salvatore Panto (M) / David Hopkins (Alt) X2
Ryan Meyer, LNAA X1Phillips Armstrong (M) / Rick Molchany (Alt X3
James Mosca, PennDOT Cental Office X1Lamont McClure (M) / Michael Emili (Alt) X3
Owen O'Neil, LANta X1
Thomas Stoudt, LNAA X1
Totals 8 10 Totals 8 17
8 Joint Technical + Coordinating Committees June 3, 2020 Meeting Voice Ballot Due to COVID-19 Pandemic Restricting In-Person Interactions* ACTION 1 ACTION 1 Technical Committee Coordinating Committee Minutes- May 6, 2020 Technical Committee Meeting Minutes- April 1, 2020 Joint Meeting Vote Vote Member Yay Nay Abstain Weight Total Member Yay Nay Abstain Weight Total
Chris Kufro, Chair X11Michael Rebert, Chair X11
Brendan Cotter, Vice Chair 2nd 1 1 Brian Hare, Vice Chair X11
Becky Bradley, Secretary X33Becky Bradley, Secretary X11
Ray O'Connell (M) / Leonard Lightner (Alt) 1st 1 1 Ray O;Connell (M) / Craig Messinger (Alt X22
Robert Donchez (M) / Darlene Heller (Alt) X11Robert Donchez (M) / Michael Alkhal (Alt) 2
Salvatore Panto (M) / David Hopkins (Alt) X11Salvatore Panto (M) / David Hopkins (Alt) X22
Ryan Meyer, LNAA X11Phillips Armstrong (M) / Rick Molchany (A 1st 3 3
James Mosca, PennDOT Cental Office X11Lamont McClure (M) / Michael Emili (Alt) 3
Owen O'Neil, LANta 2nd 1 1
Thomas Stoudt, LNAA X11
Totals 10 10 10 Totals 17 12
9 Joint Technical + Coordinating Committees June 3, 2020 Meeting Voice Ballot Due to COVID-19 Pandemic Restricting In-Person Interactions* ACTION 2 ACTION 2 Technical Committee Coordinating Committee PennDOT 5 Administrative Actions + Amendments PennDOT 5 Administrative Actions + Amendments Vote Vote Member Yay Nay Abstain Weight Total Member Yay Nay Abstain Weight Total
Chris Kufro, Chair X11Michael Rebert, Chair X11
Brendan Cotter, Vice Chair 2nd 1 1 Brian Hare, Vice Chair X11
Becky Bradley, Secretary X33Becky Bradley, Secretary X11
Ray O'Connell (M) / Leonard Lightner (Alt) X11Ray O;Connell (M) / Craig Messinger (Alt 2nd 2 2
Robert Donchez (M) / Darlene Heller (Alt) X11Robert Donchez (M) / Michael Alkhal (Alt) 2
Salvatore Panto (M) / David Hopkins (Alt) 1st 1 1 Salvatore Panto (M) / David Hopkins (Alt) X22
Ryan Meyer, LNAA X11Phillips Armstrong (M) / Rick Molchany (A 1st 3 3
James Mosca, PennDOT Cental Office X11Lamont McClure (M) / Michael Emili (Alt) 3
Owen O'Neil, LANta X11
Thomas Stoudt, LNAA X11
Totals 10 10 10 Totals 8 17 12
10 Joint Technical + Coordinating Committees June 3, 2020 Meeting Voice Ballot Due to COVID-19 Pandemic Restricting In-Person Interactions* ACTION 3 ACTION 3 Technical Committee Coordinating Committee LANta TIP Amendments 1 + 2 LANta TIP Amendments 1 +2 Vote Vote Member Yay Nay Abstain Weight Total Member Yay Nay Abstain Weight Total
Chris Kufro, Chair X11Michael Rebert, Chair X11
Brendan Cotter, Vice Chair X11Brian Hare, Vice Chair X11
Becky Bradley, Secretary 1st 3 3 Becky Bradley, Secretary X11
Ray O'Connell (M) / Leonard Lightner (Alt) X11Ray O;Connell (M) / Craig Messinger (Alt X22
Robert Donchez (M) / Darlene Heller (Alt) 2nd 1 1 Robert Donchez (M) /Michael Alkhal (Alt) 2
Salvatore Panto (M) / David Hopkins (Alt) X11Salvatore Panto (M) / David Hopkins (Alt) X22
Ryan Meyer, LNAA X11Phillips Armstrong (M) / Rick Molchany (A X33
James Mosca, PennDOT Cental Office X11Lamont McClure (M) / Michael Emili (Alt) 3
Owen O'Neil, LANta X11
Thomas Stoudt, LNAA X11
Totals 8 10 10 Totals 8 17 12
11 Joint Technical + Coordinating Committees June 3, 2020 Meeting Voice Ballot Due to COVID-19 Pandemic Restricting In-Person Interactions* ACTION 4 ACTION 4 Technical Committee Coordinating Committee ADOPTED AT THE MAY 6, 2020 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING Adoption of Walk/RollLV: Active Transportation Plan Vote Vote Member Yay Nay Abstain Weight Total Member Yay Nay Abstain Weight Total
Chris Kufro, Chair 1 Michael Rebert, Chair X11
Brendan Cotter, Vice Chair 1 Brian Hare, Vice Chair X11
Becky Bradley, Secretary 3 Becky Bradley, Secretary X11
Ray O'Connell (M) / Leonard Lightner (Alt) 1 Ray O;Connell (M) / Craig Messinger (Alt X22
Robert Donchez (M) / Darlene Heller (Alt) 1 Robert Donchez (M) /Michael Alkhal (Alt) 2
Salvatore Panto (M) / David Hopkins (Alt) 1 Salvatore Panto (M) / David Hopkins (Alt) 1st 2 2
Ryan Meyer, LNAA 1 Phillips Armstrong (M) / Rick Molchany (A 2nd 3 3
James Mosca, PennDOT Cental Office 1 Lamont McClure (M) / Michael Emili (Alt) 3
Owen O'Neil, LANta X11
Thomas Stoudt, LNAA X11
Totals 10 Totals 8 17 12
12 Joint Technical + Coordinating Committees June 3, 2020 Meeting Voice Ballot Due to COVID-19 Pandemic Restricting In-Person Interactions* ACTION 5 Coordinating Committee Adjournment Vote Member Yay Nay Abstain Weight Total
Michael Rebert, Chair X1
Brian Hare, Vice Chair X1
Becky Bradley, Secretary X1
Ray O;Connell (M) / Craig Messinger (Alt) X2
Robert Donchez (M) / Michael Alkhal (Alt) 2
Salvatore Panto (M) / David Hopkins (Alt) X2
Phillips Armstrong (M) / Rick Molchany (Alt) 1st 3
Lamont McClure (M) / Michael Emili (Alt) 3
Owen O'Neil, LANta X1
Thomas Stoudt, LNAA X1
Totals 8 17
13 US 22 Widening (C-C. Frey) MPMS 96384 - est let TBD • Design team continues to advance stormwater management and drainage design along US 22 corridor • Design team is working to minimize impacts to properties along to SR 145 • Revised Line and Grade submission incorporating DDI at SR 145 and anticipated retaining walls is deferred until August 2020 • Individual 4(f) documentation for all park impacts is under review; however, the goal is to work with Whitehall Township to pursue Net Benefit for Wood Street Park and de Minimus Use for Jordan Creek Greenway • District has identified bridge modifications necessary to accommodate sound barrier wall on the southern parapet of the bridge over North Irving Street, project is being advanced assuming it is feasible • Revised Preliminary Noise Study awaiting Line and Grade approval • Infiltration testing for stormwater basins deferred until fall 2020 SR 22, Section 08M US 22 Resurf 15th Street to SR 309 (C-M. McGuire) MPMS 96385 – est let June 18, 2020 • Project is advertised for construction as of May 1, 2020 • Previous let date effect by COVID-19 and ECMS system glitch SR 22, Section 09M US 22 Resurf 309 to I-78 Split (C-M. McGuire) MPMS 110069 – est let June 18, 2020 • Child project to #96385 • Project is advertised for construction as of May 1, 2020 • Previous let date effect by COVID-19 and ECMS system glitch SR 29, Section 04S Route 29 Signal Improvements (R. Prophet) MPMS 110169 - est let August 11, 2022 • Traffic Data Collection on hold due to COVID-19 • Traffic Analysis Model setup • Crash Analysis underway • Background environmental research ongoing SR 145, Section MLT 7th Street Multimodal Corridor Project (R. Prophet) MPMS 99697 - est let April 1, 2027 • Reduced project limits under discussion • Pennsylvania Historic Resource Survey Forms resubmitted to District for review on May 24, 2020 • Section 4(f) (Park) coordination ongoing • Phase 1 ESA (Hazardous Waste) report submitted on May 21, 2020 • Traffic Control Alternatives Memorandum approved on May 27, 2020 • Line and Grade Report and Plans approved May 28, 2020 • Safety Review expected to be submitted in late June 2020 / early July 2020 • Preliminary Signing/Pavement Marking Plans, Traffic Control Plans and Signal Plans are underway • Noise analysis on hold due to COVID-19 • Pavement design coordination underway
14 SR 145, Section 04S Route 145 Signal Improvements (R. Prophet) MPMS 110170 - est let August 11, 2022 • Traffic Data Collection on hold due to COVID-19 • Traffic Analysis Model setup • Crash Analysis underway • Background environmental research underway SR 145, Section 13S Route 145 Safety Improvements (C-M. Fallon) MPMS 109971 – est let December 8, 2022 • Safety Submission approved May 4, 2020 • PSWA Site Assessment submitted March 3, 2020 and Phase 1 ESA will be required • Phase 1 Bog Turtle Habitat Assessment report (no habitat) submitted to USFWS April 8, 2020 • Design Field View plans ongoing • Coordination with City of Allentown and HOP unit ongoing SR 222 and Shantz and 863 Improvements (C-M. McGuire) MPMS 79554 - est let July 23, 2020 • PS&E Package is under PennDOT review • NPDES permit awaiting Lehigh County Conservation District approval • Waterway permits awaiting PADEP approval SR 309, Section 14M Betterment (C-M. Fallon) MPMS 102312 – est let April 1, 2027 • Phase II Archaeological Survey and Report approved June 3, 2020 • Preliminary Traffic Control approved April 20, 2020 • Preliminary Traffic Signals approved March 31, 2020 • FD supplement in progress • DFV approved (contingent on CE approval) April 3, 2020 • 30% Constructability approved April 6, 2020 • Section 4(f)s with District for signature • Preliminary Right of Way submitted April 24, 2020 • Draft CE submitted to District May 7, 2020 SR 309 & Tilghman Interchange (K. Cox) MPMS 96432 - est let September 30, 2021 • TS&L for Broadway and Tilghman St bridges pending approval • ROW Gap plan ongoing SR 1004 Lehigh- Race St. Intersection (K. Cox) MPMS 57433 – est let July 23, 2020 • JPA under DEP review • ROW negotiation in progress • Railroad coordination ongoing • Race Street and Lehigh Street Structure plans comments received and being addressed • Let date to be changed SR 1017, Section 02S Mauch Chunk Signal Improvements (R. Prophet) MPMS 110174 - est let August 11, 2022 • Traffic Data Collection completed • Traffic Analysis being advanced, Traffic Analysis Report to be submitted in July 2020 • Crash Analysis underway • Background environmental research underway
15 Easton Two Way St Conversions (R. Rehnert) MPMS 102223 - est let May 20, 2021 • Utilities coordination ongoing • Preliminary layout of mast arm locations ongoing, finalized locations to be determined once an alternative is selected • Purpose & Need submitted and under review • Alternative Analysis report deferred to late June • Preliminary design plans deferred to early July SR 22, Section 03M Route 22 from Farmersville Rd to 512 (C-M. McGuire) MPMS 110070 – est let April 14, 2022 • Pavement design in progress • Review of guide rail/slope stability ongoing, hoping to avoid retaining wall(s) • Environmental studies are underway • Bald eagle screening form submitted • Wetland report submitted SR 248, Section 05S Route 248 Realignment (C-M. McGuire) MPMS 86853 – est let December 9, 2021 • Utility coordination is underway • 106 Process is ongoing • Assembling a structure boring contract • Design field view plans are underway SR 248, Section 06S Route 248 Signal Improvements (R. Prophet) MPMS 110176 - est let December 8, 2022 • Traffic Data Collection completed • Traffic Analysis being advanced, Traffic Analysis Report to be submitted in July 2020 • Crash Analysis underway • Background environmental research underway
16
ACRONYM REFERENCE ACM/LBP ASBESTOS CONTAINING MATERIAL / LEAD BASED PAINT ADA AMERICAN WITH DISABILITIES ACT BCCD BERKS COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT BRPA BRIDGE AND ROADWAY PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT CBR CONSTANT BIT RATE CE CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION CEE CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION EVALUATION CO CENTRAL OFFICE CRP CULTURAL RESOURCES PROFESSIONAL DCNR DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES DEP DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DFV DESIGN FIELD VIEW DO DISTRICT OFFICE E&S EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION ESA ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT FD FINAL DESIGN FHWA FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION H&H HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC HOP HIGHWAY OCCUPANCY PERMIT HRSF HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY FORM JD JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION JPA JOINT PERMIT AGREEMENT L&G LINE AND GRADE LGTS LINE, GRADE AND TYPICAL SECTION MPT MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC NOITE NOTICE OF INTENT TO ENTER NPDES NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM NTP NOTICE TO PROCEED PHMC PA HISTORICAL AND MUSEUM COMMISSION PNDI PENNSYLVANIA NATURAL DIVERSITY INVENTORY POA POINT OF ACCESS PS&E PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATE ROW RIGHT OF WAY RSGER RECONNAISSANCE SOILS AND GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING REPORT SEPS SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PLANNING SUBMISSION SFV SCOPE AND FIELD VIEW SHPO STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE SPMP SIGNING AND PAVEMENT MARKING PLAN SUE SUBSURFACE UTILITY ENGINEERING T&E THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES COORDINATION TCP TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN TIF TECHNICALLY INFEASIBILITY FORM TS&L TYPE, SIZE AND LOCATION USFWS UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
17 TIP Modifications from May 22, 2020 through June 18, 2020 MPO Tech Meeting: July 1, 2020 MPO Coord Meeting: August 5, 2020
Administrative Action #1 Fund Type FFY 2019 FFY 2020 FFY 2021 FFY 2022 FFYs 2023-2026 and Beyond Remarks Project Title MPMS Phase Amts Fed. Sta. Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Freeway Service Patrol Before NHPP Toll 666,168 0 0 Increase to cover the next 2 years of service. 78 - FSP 68190 CON Adjust NHPP Toll 439,161 143,639 Lehigh County After NHPP Toll 666,168 439,161 143,639 Tilghman St o/Lehigh & RR Before Deobligation returned to region for reassignment. 1002 - 04B 11565 PE Adjust NHPP (439,161) Lehigh County After Before BOF 185 155,952 1,289,370 1,943,352 3,356,486 97,924 15,232 7,835,516 38,501,383 NHPP source in FFY 2021. LVTS Highway & Bridge Before NHPP 581 253,157 1,312,619 1,239,576 1,047,796 1,606,486 2,171,146 32,546,131 15,437,077 Before STP 497,122 430,248 512,548 19,625,164 Line Item Reserve 102201 CON Adjust NHPP 581 (143,639) After BOF 185 155,952 1,289,370 1,943,352 3,356,486 97,924 15,232 7,835,516 38,501,383 Lehigh County After NHPP 581 253,157 1,312,619 1,095,937 1,047,796 1,606,486 2,171,146 32,546,131 15,437,077 After STP 497,122 430,248 512,548 19,625,164 Administrative Action #2 Fund Type FFY 2019 FFY 2020 FFY 2021 FFY 2022 FFYs 2023-2026 and Beyond Remarks Project Title MPMS Phase Amts Fed. Sta. Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Before CAQ 1,352,241 Increase to match revised PS&E package. Before HSIP 2,979,222 2,748,079 222 & Schantz & 873 Improv Before NHPP 4,069,641 1,014,412 Before STP 1,945,126 339,183 Before STU 1,245,033 222 - 01S 79554 CON Adjust STU 110,978 After CAQ 1,352,241 After HSIP 2,979,222 2,748,079 Lehigh County After NHPP 4,069,641 1,014,412 After STP 1,945,126 339,183 After STU 1,245,033 110,978 248/trib to Hokendauqua C Before STU Toll 1,373,415 100,000 Release due to low bid savings. Remaining balance for potential work 248 - 08B 91992 CON Adjust STU Toll (13,566) orders. Northampton County After STU Toll 1,373,415 86,434 Easton Two Way St Conversions Before Deobligation returned to region for reassignment. - TWC 102223 STUDY Adjust STU (29,036) Northampton County After Messinger Street Bridge Before Deobligation returned to region for reassignment. 1019 - 02B 12097 CON Adjust STU (68,376) Northampton County After Statewide Administrative Action #1 Fund Type FFY 2019 FFY 2020 FFY 2021 FFY 2022 FFYs 2023-2026 and Beyond Remarks Project Title MPMS Phase Amts Fed. Sta. Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) I-78 PM 2 - Lehigh Before 581 273,183 0 Increase to fully fund final design. 78 - 16M 87646 FD Adjust 581 530,000 Lehigh County After 581 273,183 530,000 Before 185 782,180 3,952,065 Source. Interstate Contingency Before NHPP 581 1,117,079 373,736 2,606,292 4,244,658 22,329,803 Line Item 75891 CON Adjust NHPP 581 (530,000) After 185 782,180 3,952,065 Central Office After NHPP 581 1,117,079 373,736 2,076,292 4,244,658 22,329,803
18 TIP Modifications from May 22, 2020 through June 18, 2020 MPO Tech Meeting: July 1, 2020 MPO Coord Meeting: August 5, 2020 Administrative Action #3 Fund Type FFY 2019 FFY 2020 FFY 2021 FFY 2022 FFYs 2023-2026 and Beyond Remarks Project Title MPMS Phase Amts Fed. Sta. Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) South Walnut Street Bridge Before BOF 183 288,000 54,000 18,000 0 0 0 Increase to incorporate modifications to the intersection of S. Main Street 7408-WSB 94680 PE Adjust BOF 183 158,672 29,751 9,917 and SR 0873 and to realign the bridge to be in alignment with the intersection Lehigh County After BOF 183 288,000 54,000 18,000 158,672 29,751 9,917 . Powder Valley Rd over Indian Creek Before BOF 185 21,220 5,305 0 0 Align with anticipated need. CE will not be received prior to TIP 2025 - 01B 109237 ROW Adjust BOF 185 (21,220) (5,305) 20,600 5,150 expiration. Lehigh County After BOF 185 0 0 20,600 5,150 YOE included. Before BOF 185 155,952 1,289,370 1,943,352 3,356,486 97,924 15,232 7,835,516 38,501,383 Balancing source to maintain fiscal constraint. LVTS Highway & Bridge Before NHPP 581 253,157 1,312,619 1,095,937 1,047,796 1,606,486 2,171,146 32,546,131 15,437,077 Before STP 497,122 430,248 512,548 19,625,164 Line Item Reserve 102201 CON Adjust BOF 185 (137,452) (24,446) (20,600) (5,150) After BOF 185 18,500 1,264,924 1,922,752 3,351,336 97,924 15,232 7,835,516 38,501,383 Lehigh County After NHPP 581 253,157 1,312,619 1,095,937 1,047,796 1,606,486 2,171,146 32,546,131 15,437,077 After STP 497,122 430,248 512,548 19,625,164 Administrative Action #4 Fund Type FFY 2019 FFY 2020 FFY 2021 FFY 2022 FFYs 2023-2026 and Beyond Remarks Project Title MPMS Phase Amts Fed. Sta. Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) Fed. ($) State ($) Loc/Oth ($) ITS Sign Upgrades - Turnpike Before NHPP Toll 698,965 581,135 Increase to meet low bid. 78 - TPI 110559 CON Adjust NHPP Toll 189,691 Lehigh County After NHPP Toll 698,965 770,826 Before BOF 185 18,500 1,264,924 1,922,752 3,351,336 97,924 15,232 7,835,516 38,501,383 Source. LVTS Highway & Bridge Before NHPP 581 253,157 1,312,619 1,095,937 1,047,796 1,606,486 2,171,146 32,546,131 15,437,077 Before STP 497,122 430,248 512,548 19,625,164 Line Item Reserve 102201 CON Adjust NHPP 581 (189,691) After BOF 185 18,500 1,264,924 1,922,752 3,351,336 97,924 15,232 7,835,516 38,501,383 Lehigh County After NHPP 581 63,466 1,312,619 1,095,937 1,047,796 1,606,486 2,171,146 32,546,131 15,437,077 After STP 497,122 430,248 512,548 19,625,164 Actions do not affect the project Before FFY Totals 13,265,570 1,444,262 18,000 9,111,247 11,175,298 0 14,776,308 13,207,697 0 6,650,874 32,841,002 0 180,020,433 161,815,380 delivery schedules or air quality FFY Adjustment Totals 0 0 0 0 0 9,917 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 conformity. After FFY Totals 13,265,570 1,444,262 18,000 9,647,820 11,175,298 9,917 14,776,308 13,207,697 0 6,650,874 32,841,002 0 180,020,433 161,815,380 NOTES: Non-zero adjustment totals due to Local Match (AA #3).
19 S TRANSPORTATION
T IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM V 2021–2024 L Lehigh Valley Transportation Study Transportation Lehigh Valley DRAFT
20 L V T S Lehigh Valley Transportation Study
L V P C Lehigh Valley Planning Commission
21 L V T S Lehigh Valley Transportation Study
Lehigh Valley Transportation Study Lehigh Valley Transportation Study Coordinating Committee Technical Committee Michael Rebert (Chair), PennDOT District 5 Christopher J. Kufro, P.E. (Chair), PennDOT District 5
Brian Hare P.E., (Vice Chair), PennDOT Central Office Brendan Cotter (Vice Chair), Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority Becky A. Bradley, AICP (Secretary), Lehigh Valley Planning Commission Becky A. Bradley, AICP, (Secretary) Lehigh Valley Planning Commission Phillips Armstrong, Lehigh County Jim Mosca, PennDOT Central Office Richard Molchany (Alt.), Lehigh County Ray O’Connell, City of Allentown Lamont G. McClure, Jr., Northampton County Leonard Lightner (Alt.), City of Allentown Michael Emili, PE (Alt.), Northampton County Robert Donchez, City of Bethlehem Ray O’Connell, City of Allentown Darlene Heller, City of Bethlehem Craig Messinger (Alt.), City of Allentown Salvatore J. Panto Jr., City of Easton Robert Donchez, City of Bethlehem Dave Hopkins, City of Easton Michael Alkhal P.E. (Alt.), City of Bethlehem Ryan Meyer, Lehigh-Northampton Airport Authority Salvatore J. Panto, Jr., City of Easton
David Hopkins (Alt.), City of Easton
Owen O’Neil, Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority
Thomas Stoudt, Lehigh-Northampton Airport Authority
DRAFT: MAY 18, 2020
22 This document is available in other formats upon request, in accordance with applicable state and federal laws. The LVPC will provide translation or interpretation services upon request. For more information, please call the LVPC at 610-264-4544. Arabic: Spanish: Este documento está disponible en otros formatos cuando se soliciten, de نيناوقلاو ةيالولا نيناوقل ًاقفو ،بلطلا دنع ىرخأ لاكشأ يف ةحاتم ةقيثولا هذه’’ conformidad con las leyes estatales y federales correspondientes. La LVPC دادعتسا ىلع (LVPC) يلاف ياه يل ةقطنمل طيطختلا ةنجل .ةيراسلا ةيلارديفلا le proporcionará servicios de traducción o interpretación si los solicita. Para .بلطلا ىلع ءانب ةيوفشلا وأ ةيريرحتلا ةمجرتلاب ةقلعتملا تامدخلا ريفوتل .obtener más información, llame a la LVPC al 610-264-4544 ‘‘610-264-4544 مقرلا ىلع ةنجللاب لاصتالا ىجرُي ،تامولعملا نم ديزم ىلع لوصحلل Traditional Chinese:
Traditional Chinese: Chinese: Vietnamese: 根據適用的州和聯邦法律 ，本文件可按要求提供其他格式。LVPC 將根據需求提供翻譯或 根據適用的州和聯邦法律，本文件可按要求提供其他格式。LVPC 將根據需求提供翻譯或 Chúng tôi có thể cung cấp tài liệu này theo các định dạng khác nếu quý vị 口譯服務。如需更多資訊，請致電 610-264-4544 聯絡 LVPC。 yêu cầu, chiếu theo luật hiện hành của tiểu bang và liên bang. LVPC sẽ cung 口譯服務。如需更多資訊，請致電 610-264-4544 聯絡 LVPC。 cấp các dịch vụ thông dịch và chuyển ngữ tài liệu khi có yêu cầu. Để biết thêm thông tin, vui lòng gọi LVPC tại số 610-264-4544. Simplified Chinese: Simplified Chinese: Chinese: 根据适用的州和联邦法律，本文件可按要求提供其他格式。 LVPC 将根据要求提供翻译或 根据适用的州和联邦法律，本文件可按要求提供其他格式。 将根据要求提供翻译或 口译服务。如需更多信息，请致电 610-264-4544 联系 LVPC。LVPC 口译服务。如需更多信息，请致电 610-264-4544 联系 LVPC。
L V T S Lehigh Valley Transportation Study This report was prepared by The Lehigh Valley Planning Commission on behalf of the Lehigh Valley Transportation Study. This report has been financed in part through funding from the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, under the State Planning and Research Program, Section 505 [or Metropolitan Planning Program, Section 104(f)] of Title 23, U.S. Code. The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the U.S. Department Tof ransportation.
23 INTRODUCTION
Federal regulations require that the TIP shall: What is the Transportation Cover a period of at least Improvement Program? The 2021-2024 Transportation Improvement 3 YEARS Program (TIP) is a four-year financial plan for Lehigh and Northampton counties, developed by the Lehigh Valley Transportation Study (LVTS). The 2021-2024 TIP consists of approximately Consist of projects from FutureLV: $451.8 million that will be invested into priority The Regional Plan, the locally transportation programs, construction projects or studies. developed transportation plan How is the Budget Created?
L Lehigh ValleyV PlanningP CommissionC L V T Roughly 80% of TIP funding comes through the Reflect the area’s Lehigh Valley TransportationS Study T R Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) with transportation the remaining 20% coming from Pennsylvania needs and priorities Department of Transportation (PennDOT) and/ or local sources. The amount the Lehigh Valley gets is primarily set by PennDOT and FHWA, based on population, vehicle miles traveled Include realistic cost and need among other federally designated factors. Once the amount is set, the LVTS and revenue estimates works to develop a program designed to serve for all projects the region’s needs, while following the policies of FutureLV: The Regional Plan and federal regulatory requirements. The need is always greater than the money available and the TIP, by federal law, can only budget money that is S reasonably expected to come to the region. The TIP is regulated under the United States Code 49 Include all highway and transit projects to U.S.C. 5303(j) and authorized under the Fixing be funded with federal money America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act).
L V T S 1 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 24 How Projects are Selected For a project to receive funding in the 2021-2024 TIP, it must meet a long list of state and federal guidelines for traffic safety, air quality and environmental justice. It also must align with the vision of FutureLV: The Regional Plan, and its 25-year Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). A core L V CP Lehigh Valley Planning Commission concept of FutureLV is Centers and Corridors, a long-range transportation investment plan that directs L V T S Lehigh Valley Transportation Study T R redevelopment, reuse and new construction to 57 economic and housing activity Centers around the Lehigh Valley and along the Corridors that connect them. Transportation project investments are then targeted to be consistent with that concept and must be identified in FutureLV before they can be CALL FOR PROJECTS programmed in the TIP.
These steps were implemented during the project selection process: 1. Call for Projects — An open call for Long-Range Transportation Plan projects went out to the public requesting federally eligible transportation projects. 2. Project evaluation process — Lehigh Valley Transportation Study (LVTS) evaluated each project submitted in eight proposal types that included Bridges; Traffic Management Technologies; Roadway Reconstruction, Modernization and Automation; Multi-use and Bicycle Facilities; Pedestrian Facilities; PROJECT EVALUATION Transit Expansion and Modernization; Rail; and Study or Plan. PROCESS
3. Project ranking — Projects were then awarded detailed scores, ranked by score with consideration L V CP Lehigh Valley Planning Commission L V T S for its category, and prioritized. Lehigh Valley Transportation Study T R 4. Preliminary findings — The ranking of projects was opened for public comment and each project sponsor was able to present project proposals and discuss them with LVTS committee members and the public. The LVTS then analyzed the proposals and checked for consistency with overall regional priorities, all operating within defined fiscal constraints. Any qualified project that could not be funded was added to an unmet needs list of projects that can be considered for future funding. PROJECT RANKING 5. Adoption — The final list of Long-Range Transportation Plan projects was adopted by LVTS on October 2, 2019.
The TIP is a constantly evolving program that changes as project costs and schedules adjust. By federal statute the program is what’s known as “fiscally constrained”, which means that the total cost of the projects on the TIP cannot exceed the money expected to be received by the LVTS. When costs increase for one project, the money often has to come from another, just as savings on a particular project can be moved into one that needs more money. PRELIMINARY FINDINGS Nearly 89% ($267,454,921) of the total funding for roadway and bridge projects or multimodal non-transit programs included in the 2021-2024 TIP ($302,119,706), carried forward from previous 2019-2022 TIP. Managing the flow of money is equally as important as managing the project schedule. Because the four-year TIP is updated every two years, the final two years of one program serves as the first two years of the next program. This funding strategy addresses high-priority transportation needs and is designed to promote a modern, efficient transportation network. The TIP is critical to the economic and social future of the region, targeting infrastructure investments that support a vibrant, inclusive, resilient and growing Lehigh Valley. ADOPTION
25 TIP DEVELOPMENT TIMELINE
1. JULY 16, 2019 7. MAY 18, 2020 PennDOT issues Financial Guidance Public comment period begins documents to Planning Partners for 8. MAY 20, 27, JUNE 3, 2020 developing the 2021-2024 TIP Virtual public meetings on draft TIP due 11 2. DECEMBER 29, 2019 to Covid-19 Pandemic 12 13 PennDOT Connects/Local Government 9. JUNE 3, 2020 Collaboration meetings completed for Public meeting on draft TIP at LVPC carryover and new potential TIP projects Joint Technical and Coordinating 3. JANUARY 8, 2020 Committee Meeting 10 LVTS develops draft TIP for PennDOT 10. JUNE 16, 2020 coordination Public comment period ends 4. MARCH 12, 2020 11. JULY 8, 2020 Interagency air quality and LVTS proposed adpotion of TIP environmental justice consultation 9 initiated 12. AUGUST 2020 PennDOT scheduled to submit 5. MARCH 14, 2020 statewide TIP to Federal Highway Interagency air quality consultations are Administration (FHWA)/Federal Transit concluded and air quality conformity Administration (FTA) for review and 8 analysis begins approval 6. APRIL 10, 2020 13. SEPTEMBER 2020 LVTS and PennDOT complete air Anticipated approval from FHWA and quality conformity and environmental FTA of the 2019 TIP program justice analysis 7 5 6
2 1 4
3
L V T S 3 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 26 L V T S Lehigh Valley Transportation Study MEETING COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES
Performance-Based Planning Air Quality & Environmental Justice The 2021-2024 TIP will be the first in the region that’s based on three new Every project on the TIP must meet federal air quality conformity standards federally set performance measures designed to reduce injuries, save lives and through travel demand modeling, as well as an Environmental Justice Benefits better manage maintenance of the region’s transportation network. and Burdens analysis. One set of measures prescribed by the Federal Highway Administration The Lehigh Valley is required to perform travel forecasting to determine (FHWA), and adopted by the LVTS in January of 2020, requires recording data transportation network demand. Transportation network demand is then on fatalities and injuries, and setting new safety goals to reduce those. evaluated for conformity under the 2008 eight-hour ozone National Ambient Air A second set of measures, adopted in 2018, collects data on National Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the 2006 24-hour NAAQS. That evaluation is Highway System and National Interstate System pavement and bridge surface designed to ensure that federal funding goes to projects that are consistent with conditions, and sets standards to improve those conditions. air quality standards. And a third set of measures was added in 2019 to collect data on congestion An Environmental Justice analysis is also performed to determine how projects and air quality impacts, by cars and trucks, on the National Highway System affect access to jobs, shopping, education and mobility for disadvantaged and National Interstate System. populations such as elderly, disabled, minority and low-income people. A conditions assessment was conducted to determine crash, transit, pavement With all three measures in place for the first time, the goal is clear: Collect data and bridge condition data in neighborhoods where disadvantaged populations and target transportation investments to improve the system. live. That information serves as a basis for evaluating the burdens and benefits Annually, the FHWA will determine whether PennDOT and the LVTS have of the TIP. Using Environmental Justice criteria for project selection helps met or made progress in meeting their goals. The end result is a project address long-standing challenges experienced by residents of historically selection process rooted in data and analysis to enhance transportation system disadvantaged communities with limited transportation alternatives, or who live performance. in places with environmental conditions threatening health and safety. The overall goal is to reduce vehicle emissions to improve air quality and eliminate barriers to access, improving the quality of the transportation system for everyone, equitably.
27 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Public participation is a key component in drafting the TIP. Community input often leads to important changes. The draft 2021-2024 TIP will be available for a 30-day public review and comment period starting May 18, 2020 and closing on June 16, 2020. Copies of the Draft TIP will be available at: • lvpc.org and Lehigh Valley Planning Commission, 961 Marcon Blvd, Suite 310, Allentown If the Covid-19 Pandemic Disaster Emergency is lifted during the public comment period and partner facilities reopen to the public, copies will be delivered to: • Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, District 5-0, 1002 Hamilton Street, Allentown • Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority (LANTA), 1060 Lehigh Street, Allentown • Allentown Public Library, 1210 Hamilton Street, Allentown • Bethlehem Public Library, 11 West Church Street, Bethlehem • Easton Public Library, 515 Church Street, Easton The LVPC website will be regularly updated. Comments on the TIP can also be made during these virtual public meetings: • 12 pm, May 20, can be accessed online at http://tiny.cc/TIP0520mtg or by phone at +1 872-222-9976, Conference ID: 568 479 393#. • 4:30 pm, May 27, can be accessed online at http://tiny.cc/ TIP0527mtg or by phone at +1 872-222-9976, Conference ID: 148 149 258#. • 9 am, June 3, Joint Technical + Coordinating Committee Meeting, can be accessed online at http://tiny.cc/LVTS0603mtg or by phone at +1 872-222-9976, Conference ID: 110 559 235#. LVTS is committed to compliance with the nondiscrimination requirements of applicable civil rights statutes, executive orders, regulations and policies. The meeting locations are accessible to persons with disabilities. With advance notification, accommodations may be provided for those with special needs related to language, sight or hearing. If you have a request for a special need, wish to file a complaint, or desire additional information, please contact the LVPC at (610) 264-4544 or [email protected]. Comments may be sent to the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission, 961 Marcon Blvd., Suite 310, Allentown, PA 18109 or submitted online at www.lvpc.org.
L V T S 5 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 28 $451,834,483 2021-2024 TOTAL TIP INVESTMENT
$23,308,376 $6,238,188 $2,880,000
Traffic Management Multi-Use Trails and Transit Expansion/ Technologies Bicycle Facilities Modernization
$124,241,626 $2,318,100 $146,834,777
Reconstruction/Modernization/ Pedestrian Facilities/ Transit Automation Safe Routes to Schools
$11,494,950 $134,518,466
Roadway Expansion Bridge Replacement/ Rehabilitation
29 2021-2024 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
N W E L V T S S Lehigh Valley Transportation Study L V T S Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 30 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
2021-2024 PROJECTS
31 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGIES Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total #
Bath Borough Traffic Signal Preliminary Engineering $ 154,500 $ — $ — $ — $ 154,500 Optimi ation: Install system to inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — sychronize traffic signals along Bath Borough, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 25,750 $ — $ — $ — $ 25,750 24 State Route 512 corridor, 14 including the traffic signals at Northampton tility Relocation $ 15,450 $ — $ — $ — $ 15,450 County State Route 87 and State Construction $ 755,300 $ 78 ,700 $ — $ — $ 1,545,000 Route 248. Total 951,000 789,700 — — 1,740,700
Freeway Service Patrol: Two Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — roaming tow trucks to respond to incidents on Interstate 78 Lehigh and inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — from State Route 100 to the Northampton Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 25 counties 145 State Route 30 split and tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Interstate 78/ S Route 22, from State Route 100 to State Construction $ 845,3 1 $ 150,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 1,4 5,3 1 Route 33. Total 845,391 150,000 250,000 250,000 1,495,391 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — MacArthur Road Signal City of inal Design $ 00,000 $ 5,250 $ — $ — $ 5,250 Allentown and Upgrade: Traffic signal Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 175,000 $ 31,000 $ — $ — $ 20 ,000 upgrades along the MacArthur hitehall 145 Road corridor, between th Township, tility Relocation $ — $ 53,450 $ — $ — $ 53,450 Street and Chestnut Street. Lehigh County Construction $ — $ 2,005,000 $ 1,7 0,000 $ 481,000 $ $4,27 ,000 Total 775,000 2,184,700 1,790,000 481,000 5,230,700
Lehigh Valley Intelligent Preliminary Engineering $ 30 ,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 30 ,000 Transportation System - inal Design $ — $ — $ 327,810 $ — $ 327,810 Phase 1: Install Variable Lehigh and Message Signs (VMS) and Northampton Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ $54, 35 $ — $ 54, 35 143 N/A Closed Circuit Television counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ 5 ,275 $ 5 ,275 Cameras (CCTV) at various Construction $ 38 ,250 $ 200,000 $ — $ 2,000,000 $ 2,58 ,250 locations along S Route 22. Total 695,250 200,000 382,445 2,056,275 3,333,970
Cedar Crest Signal Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Upgrade: Traffic Signal Salisbury inal Design $ 18,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 18,000 upgrades along the State Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 75,000 $ 38,300 $ — $ — $ 113,300 1 Route 2 (Cedar Crest Lehigh County 145 Boulevard) corridor, tility Relocation $ — $ 4,140 $ — $ — $ 4,140 between ish Hatchery Construction $ — $ — $ 700,000 $ 2,031,750 $ 2,731,750 Road to Lincoln Avenue. Total 693,000 102,440 700,000 2,031,750 3,527,190 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 248 Signal Lehigh inal Design $ 20 ,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 20 ,000 Upgrade: Traffic signal Township, upgrades at three Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 51,500 $ — $ — $ — $ 51,500 2 Northampton 145 intersections along the tility Relocation $ — $ 53,450 $ — $ — $ 53,450 County State Route 248 corridor. Construction $ — $ — $ 450,000 $ 3 ,525 $ 81 ,525 Total 257,500 53,450 450,000 369,525 1,130,475
L V T S 9 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 32 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGIES
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total #
Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Mauch Chunk Road Signal inal Design $ 154,500 $ — $ — $ — $ 154,500 Upgrades: Traffic signal South hitehall Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 51,500 $ — $ — $ — $ 51,500 32 upgrades along the State 145 Township, tility Relocation $ — $ 53,450 $ — $ — $ 53,450 Route 1017 (Mauch Chunk Lehigh County Road) corridor. Construction $ — $ 400,000 $ 241,400 $ — $ 41,400 Total 206,000 453,450 241,400 — 900,850 Traffic Operations Center: unding for an operator in the Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Traffic Operations Center inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — (TOC) in PennDOT District 5-0 Lehigh and N/A for management coverage of Northampton Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 148 Closed Circuit Television counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — (CCTV) cameras, Dynamic Construction $ 50,000 $ — $ 50,000 $ — $ 100,000 Message Signs message boards and Highway Advisory Total 50,000 — 50,000 — 100,000 Radio system.
Preliminary Engineering $ 2,345 $ — $ — $ — $ 2,345 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study Upgrade Analog Lehigh and inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — CCTVs to Digital: pgrades of Northampton Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — N/A 143 the Closed Circuit TV counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — montioring system to digital technology. Construction $ — $ 8,570 $ — $ — $ $ 8,570 Total 2,345 98,570 — — 100,915 Ama on Offsite Improve- ments: Improvements to Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — existing signalized intersections inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — along State Route 1002 (Main Palmer Strategic N/A Street) at Van Buren Road Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Safety (T-51 ) in Palmer Township and Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Highway County Project State Route 1002 ( hler Road) Construction $ 2,500,000 $ 2,500,000 $ — $ — $ 5,000,000 at both Bushkill Drive (State Route 201 ) and Sullivan Trail Total 2,500,000 2,500,000 — — 5,000,000 (State Route 2025).
Preliminary Engineering $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 200,000 Traffic Review Assist: Lehigh and inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Consulting staffing Northampton Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — N/A 148 technical review counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — assistance for traffic unit. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ Total 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 200,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Corridor Signal Improve- inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — ment Line Item: A reserve Lehigh and line item for signal improve- Northampton Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 148 N/A ments to congested corridors counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — that contain multiple signals. Construction $ — $ 10,2 0 $ 2,475 $ 185,450 $ 1 8,185 Total — 10,260 2,475 185,450 198,185
33 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGIES Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total #
Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ 350,000 $ 350,000 Coopersburg Signal inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Coopersburg Upgrade: Traffic Signal Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 37 Borough, 145 upgrades along the State tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Route 30 Road corridor. Lehigh County Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — — — 350,000 350,000
ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION/MODERNI ATION/AUTOMATION
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total #
Preliminary Engineering $ 15,450 $ — $ — $ — $ 15,450 North inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — MacArthur Road Resurfacing: hitehall and Resurface MacArthur Road Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 11 hitehall 143 (State Route 145) from Grape Townships, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Street to State Route 32 . Lehigh County Construction $ 4, 35,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 4, 35,000 Total 4,650,450 — — — 4,650,450 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — South US Route 22 Resurfacing to hitehall and inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — pper 12 I-78 Split: Resurface S Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Macungie 143 Route 22 from State Route 30 tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — to I-78 split. Townships, Lehigh County Construction $ 4,300,000 $ 335,000 $ — $ — $ 4, 35,000 Total 4,300,000 335,000 — — 4,635,000
Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 33 Resurfacing: Bethlehem, Resurface State Route 33 from Lower Nazareth inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — the Chrin Interchange to S and Plainfield Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 4 1 8 Route 22, including interchange Townships, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — ramps at State Route 248 and Northampton Hecktown Road. County Construction $ 5,250,000 $ 1, 0,000 $ — $ — $ 7,210,000 Total 5,250,000 1,960,000 — — 7,210,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — US Route 22 Resurfacing hitehall and inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — from 15th Street to MacArthur South Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 13 Road: Resurface S Route 22 hitehall 143 from 15th Street to MacArthur Townships, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Road. Lehigh County Construction $ 4,120,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 4,120,000 Total 4,120,000 — — — 4,120,000
L V T S 11 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 34 ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION/MODERNI ATION/AUTOMATION Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total #
Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — US Route 22 Resurfacing South inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — from 15th Street to State 15 hitehall Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Route 309: Resurface S Township, 143 tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Route 22 from 15th Street to Lehigh County State Route 30 . Construction $ 3, 04,500 $ — $ — $ — $ 3, 04,500 Total 3,904,500 — — — 3,904,500 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Palmer Township and inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — US Route 22 Resurfacing: ilson Revision 17 Resurface S Route 22 from Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Bethman Road to 25th Street. Borough, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Northampton County Construction $ 3,000,000 $ 0,000 $ — $ — $ 3,0 0,000 Total 3,000,000 90,000 — — 3,090,000
Lehigh Valley Transporatation Study Safety Line Item: This is Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — a line item reserve for cost inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — overruns on approved road and Lehigh and bridge projects from past and Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Northampton current Transportation Improve- tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — counties N/A ment Programs, as well as Construction $ 1,88 ,17 $ 1 8,330 $ 170,577 $ 0,000 $ 2,318,083 14 future data-driven strategic safety projects in Lehigh and Total 1,889,176 168,330 170,577 90,000 2,318,083 Northampton Counties.
Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 3022 Resurfac- inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — eisenberg ing: Resurfacing and guiderail Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 2 Township, Revision upgrades along State Route Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 3022 (Old Route 22). Construction $ 1,442,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 1,442,000 Total 1,442,000 — — — 1,442,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Catasauqua inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Race Street Resurfacing: Borough and 27 Resurface Race Street from Hanover Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 153 irst Avenue to State Route 87 Township, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — (Airport Road). Lehigh County Construction $ 1,380,200 $ — $ — $ — $ 1,380,200 Total 1,380,200 — — — 1,380,200 1: Strategic Safety Highway Project 2: Strategic Safety Highway Project
35 ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION/MODERNI ATION/AUTOMATION
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total #
Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Market Steet Resurfacing: pper Mount inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Resurface State Route 512 20 Bethel Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — (Market Street) from Main Township, 14 tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Street to State Route 11. Northampton County Construction $ 1,250,000 $ 1,041,750 $ — $ — $ 2,2 1,750 Total 1,250,000 1,041,750 — — 2,291,750 State Route 309 & Tilghman Street: Reconstruction and Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — upgrade of State Route 30 / inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 1002 (Tilghman South Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 1,210,200 $ — $ — $ — $ 1,210,200 142 1 Street) Interchange. Includes hitehall replacement and rehabilitation Township, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — of S 22 Bridge over State Lehigh County Construction $ — $ 12,250,000 $ ,000,000 $ 7, 25,000 $ 25,875,000 Route 30 and roadway drainage improvements, base Total 1,210,200 12,250,000 6,000,000 7,625,000 27,085,200 repair and overlay.
Shimersville Hill Safety Improvements: Add left turn Preliminary Engineering $ 224,3 0 $ — $ — $ — $ 224,3 0 lanes at the State Route inal Design $ 412,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 412,000 100/State Route 2 intersec- pper Milford tion. pgrade signals at State Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 30 ,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 30 ,000 5 Township, 144 Route 100/State Route 2 , St. Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ 213,800 $ — $ — $ 213,800 Peters/Shimersville Road, State Route 2 /Buckeye Road, and Construction $ — $ 3,88 ,000 $ 1, 0,500 $ — $ 5,87 ,500 State Route 2 /Colebrook Total 945,360 4,102,800 1,990,500 — 7,038,660 Avenue/Ramer Road.
State Route 145 Safety Improvements: Safety Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — improvements include milling, inal Design $ 700,000 $ 21,000 $ — $ — $ 721,000 overlay, accessibility features, City of left turning lanes and access Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 233,333 $ 24,1 7 $ — $ — $ 257,500 142 Allentown, 3 management on State Route Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ 8,333 $ 142,1 2 $ — $ 240,525 145 ( ourth Street/Susque- Construction $ — $ — $ 3,1 , 7 $ 5,833,333 $ ,000,000 hanna Street) from Emmaus Avenue to est yoming Total 933,333 143,500 3,308,859 5,833,333 10,219,025 Street.
Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Route 248 Realignment: inal Design $ 375,000 $ 34 ,000 $ — $ — $ 721,000 Bath Borough, Realign the Northampton Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 140,000 $ — $ — $ 140,000 7 Northampton Street intersection with Main 143 County tility Relocation $ 375,000 $ 213,800 $ — $ — $ 588,800 Street along State Route 248. Construction $ — $ 05,000 $ 3,584,800 $ — $ 4,48 ,800 Total 750,000 1,604,800 3,584,800 — 5,939,600
L V T S 13 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 36 ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION/MODERNI ATION/AUTOMATION
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total #
Lehigh Valley Transporatation Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Study Highway & Bridge Line inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Item: Reserve line item that Lehigh and N/A provides funding for cost Northampton Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 152 overruns on approved road and counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — bridge projects from past and Construction $ 85,3 $ 78 ,728 $ 20,833 $ 2,0 3 $ 3,088,023 current TIPs. Total 985,689 789,728 620,833 692,093 3,088,023
Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — All Weather Pavement inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Markers: Installation of all Lehigh and Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — N/A weather pavement markings at Northampton various locations throughout counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 14 the region. Construction $ 400,000 $ — $ 400,000 $ — $ 800,000 Total 400,000 — 400,000 — 800,000
Preliminary Engineering $ 343,750 $ — $ — $ — $ 343,750 Linden Street Resurfacing: inal Design $ — $ 375,000 $ 15 ,500 $ — $ 534,500 Roadway reconstruction on City of Bethlehem, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 3015 (Linden Northampton 143 Street) from Elizabeth Avenue County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — to ashington Avenue. Construction $ — $ — $ 5,000,000 $ 1,00 ,850 $ ,00 ,850 Total 343,750 375,000 5,159,500 1,009,850 6,888,100 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Urban Line Item Reserve: inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Lehigh and Reserve line item for Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — N/A Northampton New unanticipated expenses in counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — urbanized areas. Construction $ 183,858 $ 2 , 18 $ 24 ,88 $ 117,3 4 $ 817,75 Total 183,858 269,618 246,886 117,394 817,756
Preliminary Engineering $ 154,500 $ — $ — $ — $ 154,500 611 Retaining Wall Rehabili- inal Design $ — $ — $ 327,810 $ — $ 327,810 Rehabilitation of the City of Easton, tation: Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ 21,855 $ — $ 21,855 21 retaining wall along State Northampton 147 Route 11 (North Delaware County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ 112,550 $ 112,550 Drive). Construction $ — $ — $ — $ 1,250,000 $ 1,250,000 Total 154,500 — 349,665 1,362,550 1,866,715 New Reserve unding
37 ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION/MODERNI ATION/AUTOMATION
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Transportation Improvement Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Project Construction inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Assistance: Provides funding for Lehigh and consultant assistance for N/A Northampton Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — inspection and/or oversight of Counties 148 approved TIP construction projects, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — including highway, bridge and Construction $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 200,000 transportation alternative projects. Total 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 200,000 State Route 222 Corridor Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Safety Improvements: Add a signal to the intersection of pper inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 222 and State Macungie Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 43 Route 3012 (Schantz Road) as Township, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 142 well as State Route 222 and Lehigh County State Route 8 3 ( armington Construction $ 10,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 10,000 Road). Total 10,000 — — — 10,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — US Route 22 Resurfacing: Resurface of S Route 22 from Bethlehem inal Design $ 475,000 $ 87, 8 $ — $ — $ 5 2, 8 2 armersville Road to State Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 103,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 103,000 Northampton 142 Route 512, including the State tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Route 1 1 and State Route County Route 512 interchange ramps. Construction $ — $ 10,000,000 $ 5,500,000 $ — $ 15,500,000 Total 578,000 10,087,689 5,500,000 — 16,165,689
Environmental Impacts Preliminary Engineering $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ — Resolution Line Item: inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Regional line item set-aside for Lehigh and Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — monitoring, maintenance and Northampton N/A repairs of constructed wetlands counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — and Municipal Separate Storm Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Sewer System requirements on approved road and bridge Total 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 200,000 147 projects.
Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — D&L Trail Lackawanna Lower Saucon inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Resurfacing: Resurface PA Township, 1 35 11 from Bucks County line to Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Revision Northampton T-3 (Browns Drive) at the tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — County illiams Township line. Construction $ 300,000 $ 215,000 $ — $ — $ 515,000 Total 300,000 215,000 — — 515,000
1: Strategic Safety Highway Project
L V T S 15 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 38 ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION/MODERNI ATION/AUTOMATION
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total #
Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — US Route 22 Resurfacing: inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Resurface of S Route 22 from Bethlehem 42 Bethman Road to armersville Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Revision1 Road, including ramps at the Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — County State Route 33 interchange. Construction $ 20,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 20,000 Total 20,000 — — — 20,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 611 Retaining inal Design $ — $ 375,000 $ 212, 50 $ — $ 587, 50 Wall Replacements: illiams Replacement of a retaining Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 2 ,725 $ — $ — $ 2 ,725 21 wall along State Route 11 Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 54, 35 $ — $ 54, 35 147 (South Delaware Drive). County Construction $ — $ — $ 3,000,000 $ 278,100 $ 3,278,100 Total — 401,725 3,267,585 278,100 3,947,410 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ 4 1,715 $ — $ 4 1,715 Emmaus inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ 450,200 $ 450,200 Lehigh Street Betterment: Borough and Resurface State Route 2005 City of Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ 112,550 $ 112,550 30 (Lehigh Street) from State 14 Allentown, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Route 2 to State Route 145. Lehigh County Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — — 491,715 562,750 1,054,465 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Bethlehem Township and inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 33 Resurfacing: Lower Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 38 Resurface State Route 33 1 8 from I-78 to S Route 22. Saucon, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Northampton County Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — — — 300,000 300,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Union Street Railroad City of Upgrade: Signalization Allentown, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 41 147 upgrades to the nion Street Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — rail crossing. Construction $ 150,000 $ 100,000 $ — $ — $ 250,000 Total 150,000 100,000 — — 250,000 Ruppsville Road: pgrades to Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — the railroad safety equipment including the replacement of pper inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — one mast arm and one Macungie Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 40 147 cantilever to manage traffic Township, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — where Ruppsville Road Lehigh County crosses the track of Norfolk Construction $ — $ 270,200 $ — $ — $ 270,200 Southern railway. Total — 270,200 — — 270,200 1: Strategic Safety Highway Project
39 ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION/MODERNI ATION/AUTOMATION Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Broad Street Na areth Railroad Crossing: Safety improvements to upgrade Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — railroad equipment where State Nazareth inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Route 1 1 crosses the track of Borough, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 34 Norfolk Southern railway. 145 Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Includes replacement of County antiquated equipment with one Construction $ — $ 32,423 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 732,423 mast arm and one cantilever to Total — 32,423 350,000 350,000 732,423 cover three lanes of southbound traffic. Bethlehem Railroad Warning Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Safety Devices: pgrades to Bethlehem the railroad safety equipment Township, inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — where State Route 3015, City of Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 28 145 Township Line Road, Christian Bethlehem, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Springs Road and Schoeners- Northampton ville Road cross the track of County Construction $ — $ — $ 0,000 $ 500,000 $ 1,1 0,000 Norfolk Southern railway. Total — — 660,000 500,000 1,160,000 Canal Road Allentown Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Railroad Crossing: pgrade the railroad safety equipment inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — City of where Canal Road crosses the Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 3 Allentown, 14 track of Norfolk Southern Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — railway. Replace antiquated equipment with one mast arm Construction $ — $ — $ 350,000 $ — $ 350,000 and one cantilever. Total — — 350,000 — 350,000 Penn Ave Alburtis Railroad: Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — pgrades to railroad safety inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — equipment where Penn Alburtis Avenue crosses Norfolk Borough, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 3 14 Southern railway. Replace- Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — ment of antiquated equipment Construction $ — $ — $ 281,377 $ — $ 281,377 with one mast arm and one cantilever. Total — — 281,377 — 281,377
L V T S 17 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 40 ROADWAY E PANSION
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Easton Two-Way Street Conversion: Make four one-way inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — streets (2nd, Spring Garden, 4th City of Easton, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 23 Northampton 144 and erry streets) that direct tility Relocation $ 51,500 $ — $ — $ — $ 51,500 traffic through the downtown into County two-way streets. Construction $ 1,751,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 1,751,000 Total 1,802,500 — — — 1,802,500 Lehigh Race Street Intersec- tion: Add turning lanes at the intersection of Race Street and Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Lehigh Street. Signalize the inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — intersections of Race Street/- Catasauqua Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 1 ront Street and Race Borough, 142 Street/Second Street. ront Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Street and Second Street will Construction $ 2,000,000 $ 51,850 $ — $ — $ 2, 51,850 become two-way streets (one Total 2,000,000 651,850 — — 2,651,850 lane northbound and one lane southbound).
State Route 145 over Jordan Creek: Replacement/Rehabili- Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — tation and widening of the hitehall inal Design $ 50,000 $ 80,000 $ — $ — $ 1,030,000 State Route 145 (MacArthur Township and Road) Bridge over Jordan Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 700,000 $ 72,500 $ — $ — $ 772,500 22 City of Creek and the widening of 152 Allentown, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 145 to three lanes Lehigh County Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — in each direction, from airmont Avenue to Jordan Total 1,650,000 152,500 — — 1,802,500 Parkway.
State Route 309 Center Valley Interchange: The current at-grade intersection Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — of State Route 30 and inal Design $ — $ 1,250,000 $ 2,384, 00 $ — $ 3, 34, 00 pper Saucon Center Valley Parkway will be Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 25,000 $ 78,500 $ — $ 1, 03,500 8 converted to an interchange Township, 144 with a bridge crossing. A Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — southbound on-ramp from Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Center Valley Parkway to Total — 1,875,000 3,363,100 — 5,238,100 State Route 30 will be added.
41 MULTI-USE TRAILS AND BICYCLES FACILITIES
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Allentown Jordan Creek Greenway Trail: Construction inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — of the Jordan Creek Greenway City of Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 31 Allentown 1 2 Trail segment, from Turner tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Street along the Jordan Creek Lehigh County to Sumner Avenue. Construction $ 1,000,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 1,000,000 Total 1,000,000 — — — 1,000,000 D&L Trail Catasauqua to Canal Park: Construction of Catasauqua Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — D L Trail segment in the Borough, Borough of Catasauqua, Lehigh County inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 33 Lehigh County, and Hanover and Hanover Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 178 Township, Northampton Township, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — County, from the Northampton Northampton County line to Canal Park County Construction $ 838,188 $ — $ — $ — $ 838,188 along the old D L tow path. Total 838,188 — — — 838,188
Transportation Enhance- Preliminary Engineering $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 200,000 ment/Alternative Projects: inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Consultant contract to assist Lehigh and Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — N/A local sponsors in guiding Northampton 147 approved transportation counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — enhancement/alternative Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — projects. Total 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 200,000 Preliminary Engineering $ 1,500,000 $ 500,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 4,000,000 Delivery Consultant Assis- tance: Consultant assistance inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — for design aspects of project Lehigh and Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — N/A Northampton 143 delivery, including roadway, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — trails, bridge and transportation counties alternative projects. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total 1,500,000 500,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 4,000,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Construction Assistance: Consultant assistance for inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Lehigh and inspection and/or oversight of Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — N/A Northampton roadway, trail, bridge and 148 counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — transportation alternative projects. Construction $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 200,000 Total 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 200,000
L V T S 19 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 42 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES/SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOLS Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside Program Reserve Line Item: Projects defined as Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — transportation alternatives such inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — as pedestrian and bicycle Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — facilities, infrastructure projects Lehigh and N/A that enhance mobility, communi- tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Northampton 144 ty streetscape improvement Construction $ 335,100 $ 1,000 $ 1,000 $ 1,000 $ 2,318,100 counties activities, environmental Total 335,100 661,000 661,000 661,000 2,318,100 mitigation, recreational trail projects, and safe routes to school projects.
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT/REHABILITATION PROJECTS
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Wire Mill Bridge: Replace- inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — ment/Rehabilitation of the ire City of Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 51 Mill Bridge that carries State Allentown, 152 Route 145 (Lehigh Street) over Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — the Little Lehigh Creek. Construction $ 4,000,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 4,000,000 Total 4,000,000 — — — 4,000,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Indian Creek Road Bridge: inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Replacement/Rehabilitation of Allen Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 52 the bridge carrying State Route Northampton 153 301 (Indian Trail Road) over County tility Relocation $ 41,200 $ — $ — $ — $ 41,200 Hokendauqua Creek. Construction $ 2,1 2,500 $ 1,700,000 $ — $ — $ 3,8 2,500 Total 2,203,700 1,700,000 — — 3,903,700 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 1015 Bridge: inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Replacement/Rehabilitation of ashington Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 57 State Route 1015 (Lower 153 South Main Street) Bridge over Northampton tility Relocation $ 30, 00 $ — $ — $ — $ 30, 00 County Martins Creek. Construction $ 1,250,000 $ 1,01 ,000 $ — $ — $ 2,2 ,000 Total 1,280,900 1,016,000 — — 2,296,900
43 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT/REHABILITATION PROJECTS
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Preliminary Engineering $ 1,000,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 1,000,000 Hill to Hill Bridge: Replace- City of ment/Rehabilitation of the Hill inal Design $ — $ 5, 87,500 $ 72 ,500 $ — $ ,414,000 Bethlehem, to Hill Bridge (State Route 378) Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 5,150,000 $ 1 5,000 $ — $ 5,345,000 45 Lehigh and over the Lehigh River, Norfolk 152 Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ 3,250,000 $ 3,250,000 Southern railroad and city counties streets. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total 1,000,000 10,837,500 921,500 3,250,000 16,009,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Walnut Street Bridge: inal Design $ 500,000 $ 118,000 $ — $ — $ 18,000 Replacement/Rehabilitation of Slatington Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 500,000 $ 208,240 $ — $ — $ 708,240 47 the bridge that carries South Borough, 152 alnut Street over Trout Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 1 1,240 $ — $ 1 1,240 Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ 1, 25,000 $ 4,28 ,000 $ 5, 14,000 Total 1,000,000 326,240 1,816,240 4,289,000 7,431,480 hitehall Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Cementon Bridge: Replace- Township, inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — ment/Rehabilitation of the Lehigh County Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 4 Cementon Bridge carrying and Northamp- 152 State Route 32 (Main Street) ton Borough, tility Relocation $ 500,000 $ 1 5,250 $ — $ — $ 5,250 over the Lehigh River. Northampton Construction $ — $ 7,500,000 $ 3,750,000 $ 3,3 5,300 $ 14, 45,300 County Total 500,000 7,695,250 3,750,000 3,395,300 15,340,550 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — High Friction Surfaces 2021: Lehigh and Installation of High riction Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Northampton Surface treatments at various 145 counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — locations. Construction $ 400,000 $ — $ 400,000 $ — $ 800,000 Total 400,000 — 400,000 — 800,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Geiger s Covered Bridge: hitehall Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 73 Rehabilitation of Historic Township, Revision1 Geiger s Covered Bridge. Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Construction $ 400,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 400,000 Total 400,000 — — — 400,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Newburg Road Bridge: inal Design $ 375,000 $ 140,000 $ — $ — $ 515,000 Rehabilitation of State Route Lower Nazareth Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 51,500 $ — $ — $ — $ 51,500 53 3020 (Newburg Road) bridge 155 over a tributary of Monocacy Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 1 ,3 0 $ — $ 1 ,3 0 County Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ 1,250,000 $ 2,028,100 $ 3,278,100 Total 426,500 140,000 1,266,390 2,028,100 3,860,990 1: Strategic Safety Highway Project
L V T S 21 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 44 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT/REHABILITATION PROJECTS
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Preliminary Engineering $ 375,000 $ 8,800 $ — $ — $ 473,800 Hollenbachs Bridge: inal Design $ — $ 470,3 0 $ — $ — $ 470,3 0 Replacement/Rehabilitation of Lowhill Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 181,730 $ — $ — $ 181,730 55 State Route 400 Hollenbachs Township, 154 Bridge over Mill Creek and Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 7 ,4 0 $ — $ 7 ,4 0 Newside Road. Construction $ — $ — $ 1,000,000 $ 420,510 $ 1,420,510 Total 375,000 750,890 1,076,490 420,510 2,622,890 Preliminary Engineering $ 375,000 $ 243,000 $ — $ — $ 18,000 Farmersville Road Bridge: Bethlehem inal Design $ — $ — $ 250,000 $ 187,080 $ 437,080 Replacement/Rehabilitation of Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ 81, 55 $ — $ 81, 55 54 State Route 202 ( armersville Northampton 155 Road) Bridge over S Route tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ 5 ,275 $ 5 ,275 County 22. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ 2,125,000 $ 2,125,000 Total 375,000 243,000 331,955 2,368,355 3,318,310 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Kernsville Road Bridge: inal Design $ 312,500 $ 202,500 $ — $ — $ 515,000 Replacement/Rehabilitation of North hitehall Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 51,500 $ — $ — $ — $ 51,500 50 the bridge carrying State Route Township, 154 4003 (Kernsville Road) over Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 27,320 $ — $ 27,320 Jordan Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ 2,500,000 $ 1,870,800 $ 4,370,800 Total 364,000 202,500 2,527,320 1,870,800 4,964,620 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Meadows Road Bridge: Lower Saucon inal Design $ 250,000 $ 31 ,500 $ — $ — $ 5 ,500 Bridge Replacement/Rehabili- Township Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 75,000 $ 7 ,500 $ — $ — $ 154,500 tation of Northampton County 70 Northampton 153 Bridge 15; T-37 (Meadows tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ 5 ,275 $ 5 ,275 County Road) over Saucon Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total 325,000 396,000 — 56,275 777,275 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 29 Bridge: inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Replacement/Rehabilitation of pper Milford Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 74 the State Route 2 (Chestnut 152 Street) Bridge over Reading Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Railroad. Construction $ 300,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 300,000 Total 300,000 — — — 300,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — inal Design $ 225,100 $ — $ — $ — $ 255,100 Raubsville Road Bridge: illiams Replacement/Rehabilitation of Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 5 ,275 $ — $ — $ — $ 5 ,275 3 153 State Route 200 (Raubsville Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ 12,030 $ — $ — $ 12,030 Road) Bridge over rey s Run. County Construction $ — $ 812,500 $ 3 0, 70 $ — $ 1,203,170 Total 281,375 824,530 390,670 — 1,496,575
45 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT/REHABILITATION PROJECTS
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Preliminary Engineering $ 250,000 $ 3 8,000 $ — $ — $ 18,000 Beth-Bath Pike: Replace- East Allen inal Design $ — $ 250,000 $ 284,500 $ — $ 534,500 ment/Rehabilitation of the Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ 81, 55 $ — $ 81, 55 5 State Route 512 (Beth-Bath Northampton 155 Pike) Bridge over a tributary of tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ 1 ,883 $ 1 ,883 County the Monocacy Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Total 250,000 618,000 366,455 641,883 1,876,338 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Howertown Road Bridge: inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Allen Township, Replacement/Rehabilitation of Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 180,250 $ — $ — $ — $ 180,250 5 the State Route 3017 Northampton 153 (Howertown Road) Bridge over County tility Relocation $ — $ 11 ,815 $ — $ — $ 11 ,815 Dry Run. Construction $ — $ — $ 1,250,000 $ 82 ,130 $ 2,07 ,130 Total 180,250 116,815 1,250,000 826,130 2,373,195 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Catasauqua Race Street Over Lehigh inal Design $ 00,000 $ 172,500 $ — $ — $ 772,500 Borough and River: Replacement/Rehabili- Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 154,500 $ — $ — $ — $ 154,500 48 tation of the State Route 1004 hitehall 153 (Race Street) Bridge over the Township, tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 1 3, 05 $ — $ 1 3, 05 Lehigh County Lehigh River. Construction $ — $ 2,750,000 $ 1, 00,000 $ 50,000 $ 5,300,000 Total 754,500 2,922,500 1,763,905 950,000 6,390,905 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 33 Bridges: Replacement/Rehabilitation of Stockertown inal Design $ 1,800,000 $ 4 ,000 $ — $ — $ 2,2 ,000 the bridges that carry State Borough, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 128,750 $ — $ — $ — $ 128,750 44 Route 33 northbound and 152 Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ 53,450 $ — $ — $ 53,450 Southbound over the Bushkill County Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ 10,000,000 $ , 8, 00 $ 1 , 8, 00 Total 1,928,750 519,450 10,000,000 9,668,600 22,116,800 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 3020 Bridge: pper Nazareth inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Replacement/Rehabilitation of Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 77,250 $ — $ — $ — $ 77,250 7 State Route 3020 (Newburg Nothampton 15 Road) Bridge over the east County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 27,320 $ — $ 27,320 branch of Monocacy Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total 77,250 — 27,320 — 104,570 Preliminary Engineering $ 750,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 750,000 inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Bridge Preservation & Lehigh and Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — N/A Repair: Preservation and Northampton 14 repair contract for bridges. counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Construction $ 4,500,000 $ 500,000 $ — $ — $ 5,000,000 Total 5,250,000 500,000 — — 5,750,000
L V T S 23 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 46 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT/REHABILITATION PROJECTS Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Old Carriage Road Bridge: East Allen inal Design $ 375,000 $ 37,000 $ — $ — $ 412,000 Replacement/Rehabilitation of Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 25,750 $ — $ — $ — $ 25,750 5 the State Route 3018 (Old Northampton 155 Carriage Road) Bridge over a tility Relocation $ — $ 1 ,035 $ — $ — $ 1 ,035 County tributary to Catasauqua Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ 375,000 $ 553,7 5 $ 28,7 5 Total 400,750 53,035 375,000 553,795 1,382,580 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Powder Valley Road Bridge: inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — pper Milford Replacement/Rehabilitation of Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 7 the State Route 2025 (Powder Township, 154 Valley Road) Bridge over Lehigh County tility Relocation $ 15,450 $ — $ — $ — $ 15,450 Indian Creek. Construction $ 300,000 $ 715,550 $ — $ — $ 1,015,550 Total 315,450 715,550 — — 1,031,000 Preliminary Engineering $ 300,000 $ 0,500 $ — $ — $ 3 0,500 Country Club Road Bridge: Bethlehem inal Design $ — $ 250,000 $ 177, 00 $ — $ 427, 00 Replacement/Rehabilitation of Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 80,175 $ — $ — $ 80,175 1 the bridge that carries State Northampton 155 Route 2031 (Country Club County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ 5 ,275 $ 5 ,275 Road) over S Route 22. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Total 300,000 390,675 177,600 681,275 1,549,550 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — inal Design $ 250,000 $ 5 ,000 $ — $ — $ 30 ,000 Mill Road Bridge: Replace- pper Saucon ment/Rehabilitation of the Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 25,750 $ — $ — $ — $ 25,750 2 Township, 154 State Route 2024 (Mill Road) Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ 10, 0 $ — $ — $ 10, 0 Bridge over Saucon Creek. Construction $ — $ 25,000 $ 54 , 40 $ — $ 1,174, 40 Total 275,750 694,690 549,940 — 1,520,380 Preliminary Engineering $ 275,000 $ 5 ,750 $ — $ — $ 334,750 Mosserville Road Bridge: inal Design $ — $ — $ 300,4 5 $ — $ 300,4 5 Replacement/Rehabilitation of Lynn Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ 27,320 $ — $ 27,320 the State Route 4024 Lehigh County 155 (Mosserville Road) Bridge over tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ 1 ,883 $ 1 ,883 Ontelaunee Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Total 275,000 59,750 327,815 641,883 1,304,448 Preliminary Engineering $ 250,000 $ 110,500 $ — $ — $ 3 0,500 Hecktown Road Bridge: Bethlehem inal Design $ — $ 250,000 $ 177, 00 $ — $ 427, 00 Replacement/Rehabilitation of Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 80,175 $ — $ — $ 80,175 8 the State Route 2027 155 Northampton (Hecktown Road Bridge) over tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ 5 ,275 $ 5 ,275 County S Route 22. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total 250,000 440,675 177,600 56,275 924,550
47 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT/REHABILITATION PROJECTS
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Preliminary Engineering $ 250,000 $ 84,750 $ — $ — $ 334,750 Indian Creek Road Bridge: inal Design $ — $ — $ 250,000 $ 74, $ 324, Replacement/Rehabilitation of pper Milford Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ 54, 35 $ — $ 54, 35 71 the State Route 2018 (Indian Township, 155 Creek Road) Bridge over Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ 1 ,883 $ 1 ,883 Leibert Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total 250,000 84,750 304,635 91,882 731,267 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Preserve & Repair 5: Lehigh and Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — N/A Preservation and rehabilitation Northampton 153 contract for various bridges. counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Construction $ 250,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 250,000 Total 250,000 — — — 250,000 Preliminary Engineering $ 200,000 $ 10 ,000 $ — $ — $ 30 ,000 hitehall inal Design $ — $ — $ 54 ,350 $ — $ 54 ,350 Replace- Fifth Street Bridge: Township, ment of the ifth Street Bridge Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ 150,000 $ 3,128,100 $ 3,278,100 4 Lehigh County Revision over S Route 22. tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ 225,100 $ 225,100 Construction $ — $ — $ — $ 1, 00,000 $ 1, 00,000 Total 200,000 109,000 696,350 5,253,200 6,258,550 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 1032 Bridge: Portland Replacement of State Route Borough, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 77 153 1032 (State Street) Bridge over Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Jacoby Creek and Mill Race. County Construction $ 200,000 $ — $ — $ — $ 200,000 Total 200,000 — — — 200,000 Preliminary Engineering $ 75,000 $ 25,000 $ — $ — $ 100,000 Bridge Review: Structural inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — review and management Lehigh and Northampton Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — N/A responsibilities for bridge 153 replacements and rehabilita- counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — tions on the TIP. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total 75,000 25,000 — — 100,000 State Route 4019 Bridges: Bridge replacements at various Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — locations: State Route 401 Bushkill and Moore inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 78 (Bushkill Drive) over tributary 15 to Bushkill Creek; State Route Townships, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ 5,150 $ — $ — $ — $ 5,150 401 (Mountain Road) over Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — County west fork of Bushkill Creek; Construction $ — $ 138, 70 $ — $ — $ 138, 70 State Route 401 (Mountain Road) over Horn Creek. Total 5,150 138,970 — — 144,120 Strategic Safety Highway Project
L V T S 25 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 48 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT/REHABILITATION PROJECTS
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — inal Design $ — $ 1,000,000 $ 03,500 $ — $ 1, 03,500 Gap Bridge Repairs: Repairs ashignton of State Route 873 Bridge over Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 53,450 $ — $ — $ 53,450 0 Township, 153 the Lehigh River and Norfolk Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 10, 27 $ — $ 10, 27 Southern railroad. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total 250,000 1,053,450 614,427 — 1,667,877 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 611 Culvert Replacement: illiams inal Design $ — $ 250,000 $ 177, 00 $ — $ 427, 00 Replacement/Rehabilitation of Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 5,345 $ — $ — $ 5,345 4 the State Route 11 (South Northampton 154 Delaware Drive) culvert over a tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 10, 27 $ — $ 10, 27 County tributary to the Delaware River. Construction $ — $ — $ 500,000 $ 483,430 $ 83,430 Total — 255,345 688,527 483,430 1,427,302 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ 1,500,000 $ 103,500 $ — $ 1, 03,500 inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ 450,000 $ 450,000 Bo Culvert Bundle Round 2: Lehigh and Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — N/A Box culvert replacements at Northampton 155 various locations. counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — 1,500,000 103,500 450,000 2,053,500 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Richmond Bridge: Replace- inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — ment/Rehabilitation of State ashignton Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 58 Route 11 (South Delaware 153 Drive) Bridge over Oughough- Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ 21,380 $ — $ — $ 21,380 County ton Creek. Construction $ — $ 1,000,000 $ 24,200 $ — $ 1, 24,200 Total — 1,021,380 924,000 — 1,945,580 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — inal Design $ — $ 00,000 $ 1 ,000 $ — $ 1,0 ,000 Lehigh and Bo Culvert Bundle Round 1: Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — N/A Box culvert replacements at Northampton 152 various locations. counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Construction $ — $ — $ 1,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 2,500,000 Total — 900,000 1,169,000 1,500,000 3,569,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ 750,000 $ — $ — $ 750,000 Bridge Preservation & Repair inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Lehigh and 7: Bridge preservation contract Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — N/A for consultant design and Northampton 153 construction of various bridge counties tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — repairs and preservation. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Total — 750,000 — 500,000 1,250,000
49 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT/REHABILITATION PROJECTS
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 1039 Bridge - 1: pper Mount inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Bethel Replacement/Rehabilitation of Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 1 ,035 $ — $ — $ 1 ,035 82 the State Route 103 (River Township, 15 Road) Bridge over a tributary Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 5,4 4 $ — $ 5,4 4 of the Delaware River. County Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — 16,035 5,464 — 21,499 — Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 1039 Bridge - 2: pper Mount inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Bethel Replacement/Rehabilitation of Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 1 ,035 $ — $ — $ 1 ,035 83 the State Route 103 (River Township, 15 Road) Bridge over a tributary Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 5,4 4 $ — $ 5,4 4 of the Delaware River. County Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — 16,035 5,464 — 21,499 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 4019 Bushkill inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Drive Bridge: Rehabilitation Bushkill Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 1 ,035 $ — $ — $ 1 ,035 84 of State Route 401 (Bushkill 15 Drive) Bridge over tributary of Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 5,4 4 $ — $ 5,4 4 County Bushkill Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — 16,035 5,464 — 21,499 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 4019 East inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Mountain Road Bridge: Bushkill Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 1 ,035 $ — $ — $ 1 ,035 85 Rehabilitation of State Route 15 401 (East Mountain Road) Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 5,4 4 $ — $ 5,4 4 County Bridge over Horn Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — 16,035 5,464 — 21,499 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Hoch Road Bridge 28783: Replacement/Rehabilitation of Moore inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 4007 (Hoch Road) Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 1 ,035 $ — $ — $ 1 ,035 80 15 Bridge Number 28783 over Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 5,4 4 $ — $ 5,4 4 Tributary of Hokendauqua County Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — 16,035 5,464 — 21,499 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Hoch Road Bridge 28784: inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Replacement/Rehabilitation of Moore State Route 4007 (Hoch Road) Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ 1 ,035 $ — $ — $ 1 ,035 81 15 Bridge Number 28784 over Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ 5,4 4 $ — $ 5,4 4 tributary of Hokendauqua County Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Creek. Total — 16,035 5,464 — 21,499
L V T S 27 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 50 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT/REHABILITATION PROJECTS
Federal Federal Federal Federal LRTP Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ 250,000 $ 250,000 State Route 4003 Bridge inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — eisenberg Kecks Road : Replace- Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 75 ment/Rehabilitation of State Township, 15 Route 4003 (Kecks Road) Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Bridge over Interstate 78. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — — — 250,000 250,000 — Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ 400,000 $ 400,000 State Route 3015 Adams inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — pper Road Bridge: Replace- Macungie Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 72 ment/Rehabilitation of the Township, 155 Adams Road Bridge over tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Lehigh County Interstate 78. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — — — 400,000 400,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ 200,000 $ 200,000 Easton Road Bridge: inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Replacement/Rehabilitation of Lower Saucon Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 7 the State Route 200 (Easton 158 Road) Bridge over the east Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — County branch of the Saucon Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — — — 200,000 200,000 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 2027 Hosensack inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Bridge: Rehabilitation/Re- pper Milford Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 0 placement of State Route 2027 Township, 15 over a branch of Hosensack Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ 1 ,883 $ 1 ,883 Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — — — 16,883 16,883 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 143 Bridge: inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Rehabilitation of State Route Lynn Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ 1 ,883 $ — $ 1 ,883 8 155 143 Bridge over a tributary of Lehigh County tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Ontelaunee Creek. Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — — 16,883 — 16,883 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 4014 Bridge: Rehabilitation of State Route Heidelberg Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ 1 ,883 $ 1 ,883 87 Township, 15 4014 Bridge over a tributary of tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Mill Creek. Lehigh County Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — — — 16,883 16,883
51 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT/REHABILITATION PROJECTS
Federal Federal Federal Federal LRTP Map Project Name/ Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page # Description Location Project Phase 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total # Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 1004 Bridge: Lower Mount inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Rehabilitation/Replacement of Bethel Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ 1 ,883 $ 1 ,883 8 State Route 1004 Bridge over Township, 15 a tributary to the Delaware Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — River. County Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — — — 16,883 16,883 — Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 512 Bridge: Bangor Rehabilitation of the State Borough, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ 1 ,883 $ 1 ,883 88 15 Route 512 Bridge over Brushy Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Meadow Creek. County Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — — — 16,883 16,883 Preliminary Engineering $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — inal Design $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — State Route 1002 Bridge: Palmer Replacement/Rehabilitation of Township, Right-of- ay Acquisition $ — $ — $ — $ 11,255 $ 11,255 1 15 the State Route1002 Bridge Northampton tility Relocation $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — over the Schoeneck Creek. County Construction $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — Total — — — 11,255 11,255
L V T S 29 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 52 TRANSIT E PANSION/MERNI ATION
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page Project Name/Description Funding Source 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total #
Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority ederal $ 0,000 $ 0,000 $ 480,000 $ 480,000 $ 2,880,000 LANTA Bus Replacement: Congestion Mitigation State $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — and Air uality Improvement (CMA ) Program 143 funding used to help replace ten diesel buses with Local $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — compressed natural gas buses. Total 960,000 960,000 480,000 480,000 2,880,000
TRANSIT/LANTA
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page Project Name/Description Funding Source 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total #
LANTA Operating Assistance: unding for annual ederal $ 500,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 71,3 $ 5,471,3 operating assistance to help cover the costs of the State $ 18,815,587 $ 18,815,587 $ 18,815,587 $ 18,815,587 $ 75,2 2,348 state s urban and rural transit systems to provide local 1 4 public transportation service. Local $ 1,108,3 $ 1,1 3,785 $ 1,221, 74 $ 1,283,073 $ 3,555,224 Total 20,423,953 21,979,372 22,037,561 21,070,056 85,510,942
LANTA Shared Ride Operating Assistance: unding ederal $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — for the Shared Ride Program, which enables people State $ 3,527,000 $ 3,527,000 $ 3,527,000 $ 3,527,000 $ 14,108,000 5 years and older to pay a reduced rates for shared 1 4 ride, demand-responsive (normally curb to curb) Local $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — services. Total 3,527,000 3,527,000 3,527,000 3,527,000 14,108,000
Associated Capital Maintenance Items: Replace- ederal $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 320,000 ment and refurbishment of associated capital State $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — maintenance items which include tire lease agreement 1 4 and capital maintenance items. Local $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 80,000 Total 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 400,000
LANTA Facility Improvements and Equipment: ederal $ 30 , 0 $ 320,000 $ 320,000 $ 320,000 $ 1,2 , 0 unding over two years for engineering, design, State $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — renovation and construction activities at LANTA-owned 1 4 or leased facilities, including miscellaneous facility Local $ 77,402 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 317,402 improvements, and shop and office equipment. Total 387,011 400,000 400,000 400,000 1,587,011
ederal $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 2, 52,000 Purchase Van/Minibuses: Over the four-year period, State $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — 5 diesel vehicles will be replaced with gasoline 180 vehicles. Local $ 81 ,000 $ 72 ,000 $ 42,000 $ 1 5,750 $ 1,710,750 Total 1,479,000 1,392,000 1,305,000 828,750 5,004,750
Preventative Maintenance Federal : unding used ederal $ 4,040,000 $ 4,040,000 $ 4,040,000 $ 4,040,000 $ 1 ,1 0,000 for preventative maintenance on the LANTA s fixed State $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — route fleet and its administrative/operating/mainte- 1 4 nance facilities. Local $ 1,010,000 $ 1,010,000 $ 1,010,000 $ 1,010,000 $ 4,040,000 Total 5,050,000 5,050,000 5,050,000 5,050,000 20,200,000
53 TRANSIT/LANTA
Future Federal Federal Federal Federal LV Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Page Project Name/Description Funding Source 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total #
ADA Paratransit Service Capitali ation: unding to ederal $ 801,100 $ 801,100 $ 801,100 $ 801,100 $ 3,204,400 cover a portion of operating expenses associated with State $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — the provision of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 180 paratransit service. Local $ 200,275 $ 200,275 $ 200,275 $ 200,275 $ 801,100 Total 1,001,375 1,001,375 1,001,375 1,001,375 4,005,500 Service Vehicles Replacement: unding for the replacement of eight non-revenue service vehicles. ederal $ 4 , 00 $ 74,400 $ 74,400 $ — $ 1 8,400 Projects occurring under this line item will assist in State $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — meeting LANTA’s Transit Asset Management (TAM) 1 4 Local $ 12,400 $ 18, 00 $ 18, 00 $ — $ 4 , 00 Plan Goals and Targets under the ederal Transit Administration. Total 62,000 93,000 93,000 — 248,000
Heavy-Duty Bus Purchase: Over the four-year ederal $ 3,754, 81 $ 1, 1,000 $ 1,511,000 $ 3,1 7,3 4 $ 10,454,074 period, 18 diesel or hybrid diesel-electric buses will be State $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — replaced with either hybrid diesel-electric buses or 1 4 compressed natural gas buses. Local $ 38, 70 $ 4 7,750 $ 377,750 $ 7 ,348 $ 2, 13,51 Total 4,693,351 2,488,750 1,888,750 3,996,742 13,067,593 Intelligent Transportation System and Security Project: Purchase/replace/upgrade of communication ederal $ 435,010 $ 3,500 $ 3,500 $ 80,110 $ 1,842,120 or monitoring technology, computer hardware and State $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — software and servers, computers, printers and other 1 4 Local $ 1 8,835 $ 225, 58 $ 225, 58 $ 80,110 $ 700,8 1 computer technology for the administration and operation of LANtaBus or LANtaVan systems. Total 603,845 889,458 889,458 160,220 2,542,981
Sign, Shelters and Enhancements: Improve passen- ederal $ 32,000 $ 32,000 $ 32,000 $ 32,000 $ 128,000 ger amenities at heavily used bus stops and transit State $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — centers through the purchase, installation and mainte- 180 nance of accurate and informative bus stop signs at Local $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 32,000 passenger shelters, waiting areas and benches. Total 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 160,000 TOTAL LANTA 38,327,535 37,920955 36,812,144 36,654,143 149,714,777
L V T S 31 Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 54 55
L V P C L V T S Lehigh Valley Planning Commission Lehigh Valley Transportation Study
Lehigh Valley Planning Commission / Lehigh Valley Transportation Study 961 Marcon Boulevard, Suite 310 Allentown, Pennsylvania 18109 Phone: 610-264-4544 / Website: www.lvpc.org Email: [email protected] Draft 2021-2024 Transportation Improvement Program Public Comments and Responses Public comment period: May 18 and June 16, 2020
Comment Organization Commenter Date Comment LVPC Response Number Upon the review of the draft TIP, I note that the Two Rivers Trail Gap The Two Rivers Trail Gap, a Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside (TASA) project was proposed as a multi-modal investment project for a pedestrian trail along State Route 33 from Sullivan Trail to 9A trail connector project (Bushkill Township, Plainfield Township, Henry Road. Trail installation includes include signage, pavement marking, and fencing. Unfortunately the applicant, Northampton County, was unable to pursue the project due to permitting Northampton County) was left off of the TIP. Do you have any insight challenges within state highway rights-of-way. This resulted in substantial project cost challenges that have paused the project hopefully, temporarily. The project is still a priority for the region as why it was not listed on the TIP? noted in FutureLV: The Regional Plan. Because of the time limitations for the expenditure of the TASA funds the County decided to return the funding to the LVTS. PennDOT and the County are working through the permitting concerns and the LVTS is hopeful that federal funding can be moved back to the project soon. Plainfield Township Thomas Petrucci 5/18/2020 1 Anything for passenger rail? The LVTS and Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority (LANTA) work closely to collaborate on planning, programming and funding public transit projects that enhance the mobility of transit riders within the Lehigh Valley. Currently, the LVTS and LANTA have identified a Bus Rapid Transit/Enhanced Bus routing system that will serve as an express service along the most- heavily traveled commuter corridors in the Lehigh Valley, as designated in the Centers & Corridors concept within FutureLV: The Regional Plan. The goals and objectives for establishing a Bus Rapid Transit/Enhanced Bus system are focused on benefiting current riders, expanding the transit market by attracting new riders, promoting revitalization to the Valley's urban core, and maximizing the ridership by hours of service all through a financially feasible plan. FutureLV, which plans for the region's needs for 25 years and beyond, envisions Bus Rapid Transit as a flexible Public Comment Tony (first name only) 5/20/2020 2 and green system that supports a rapidly evolving region. What are logistic companies contributing to all of this? Logistics companies have participated in the Freight Advisory Committee, also known as WorkshopLV: Freight, which is a working group of the LVTS. That specific work through the freight plan process is incorporated in FutureLV and flows into the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) which flows into the TIP process. Anyone who is interested can be a member. The next meeting is August 5, 2020. There is a strong focus on truck parking and overall truck mobility, since the needs of the freight community have changed with the pandemic. We are addressing the long-term and short-term issues from before the pandemic and now, of the pandemic. There are a number of projects in the draft TIP, like the Route 22 Resurfacing project and Route 100 reconstruction project that address freight industry and community concerns. These issues came up through the freight advisory committee, through the freight planning process, to FutureLV on to the TIP. Public Comment Raymundo Hernandez 5/20/2020 3 With COVID-19 being the new normal, has anyone reached out to The LVTS has been working with educational institutions, including colleges and university through the Multimodal Working Group and through the Walk/RollLV: Active Transportation Planning school districts in the area to plan for cycling and other transportation process. Lehigh Valley Planning Commission Executive Director and LVTS Secretary Becky Bradley introduced Scott Slingerland from the Coalition for Appropriate Transportation (CAT) which is methods for the kids that allow for social distancing? funded through Transportation Alternative Set Aside dollars to teach safe cycling and promote cycling to a number of elementary schools. LVTS also funds Community Bike Works, who have an earn a bike program for underprivileged youth. In addition, the bi-county planning commission, the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission, regularly comments on land development proposals, like the proposed Lehigh Valley Academy Regional Charter School, planning a new school in Bethlehem Township, to support the addition of safe walking and cycling access to the property and within it. There are many other initiatives underway as well through The LINK trail partnership and multi-municipal planning efforts that are noteworthy too. We encourage you to visit the lvpc.org, Public Comment Raymundo Hernandez 5/20/2020 4 www.thelinktrails.com to learn more. I understand that a lot of the funding is being provided by the federal Public participation is an extremely important element in plan development throughout the LVPC and is required by law for federally funded programming. Examples of opportunities made by the government, but how are we incorporating the community in all of this? LVPC include participation from table dialogues, public working groups and partnerships that collaborate to identify the plans and funding program for the region's transportation infrastructure. How can entrepreneurs help contribute to these project? Anyone is welcome to join, at any time, the open roundtables on the FreightLV and Multi-Modal Working Group. Additionally, everyone is invited to attend the LVTS Technical and Coordinating Committee meetings. The LVTS relies on the Workshop LV: Freight and WorkshopLV: Multimodal for ideas and problem solving that support the investment strategy. Public Comment Raymundo Hernandez 5/20/2020 5 Have any of the planners been to OR examined countries like the Absolutely, planners need to be avid travelers. We did Walk/RollLV, and LANTA invested into Bus Rapid Transit plan because we are committed to balance mobility in our region. We have Netherlands and Denmark? These are countries that have triple down adopted the philosophy through the new regional plan that walking, biking, rolling, being in a personal vehicle, a box trucks or a tractor trailer are all equal modes of travel, and all should have safe on bike lanes, light rails, bus systems, etc. passage and mobility throughout our region. Since after World War II, we tended to favor cars or trucks, however our strategy through FutureLV: the Regional Plan is a focus on moving not just vehicles, but people. We work with all 62 municipalities and both counties with their individual efforts, either through county planning at the LVPC or through LVTS. We draw from the experience of our community, the over 400 Metropolitan Planning Organizations in the US and other countries in our professional work to learn and determine what we can innovate to improve mobility here. Public Comment Raymundo Hernandez 5/20/2020 6 I often see the bike logos on the streets of Allentown, and I am troubled There are several forms of bicycle systems and applications depending on the needs of the community, safety and physical space limitations, among other factors. For example in urban settings a by them. Why spend money in these "road logos" when we know those community may have very limited space between each side of sidewalk/street. They are often have to balance the need for vehicle parking, pedestrians and rollers and cyclists in space that small. aren't proper bicycle lanes? Why not combine the funding and slowly So they are forced to make choices that keep all modes as safe as possible. You may not have space for a bike lane without eliminating a vehicle lane, which creates a one-way condition that start from City Center (as an example). To add to that, I live in supports higher speed traffic and decreases safety for cyclists. Solutions have to be tailored to the specific environment. Walk/RollLV: The Active Transportation Plan is addressing regionally Whitehall, and one day as I was traveling to work (by bike), a police multimodal mobility issues at the regional level as well. The LVTS and LVPC host a WorkshopLV: Multimodal Working Group that continues to contribute planning of walking, biking, ADA officer on a bike (on Hamilton St.), told me to get of the sidewalk and accessibility along with sensible connections to public transit. More information on the Walk/Roll plan and WorkshopLV: Multimodal is available at lvpc.org go on the street. There's a huge disconnect here, or I'm I talking nonsense? The bike markings were put in by the City of Allentown are called sharrows and they were designed to promote sharing the roadway. Theses types of solutions can be effective in certain scenarios and have been identified throughout the Lehigh Valley in Walk/RollLV: The Active Transportation plan which has been adopted by the LVTS. The document may be found on the lvpc.org website for reference and as a concerned citizen we encourage to review it, if you have not already done so. Public Comment Raymundo Hernandez 5/20/2020 7 When local/state roadway projects are optimized for vehicle throughput An increase in the number of vehicles will impact the safety of other modes of transportation and increased speeds can make streets less safe. That’s why it was so important to have created and speed, how do we reconcile the impact these projects have for Walk/RollLV: Active Transportation Plan, which was written simultaneously with the update of FutureLV: The Regional Plan. FutureLV is an umbrella document for all the specific documents that local residents crossing the street, traffic noise, quality of life? i.e. does flow into it, like the Walk/RollLV: Active Transportation Plan. Walk/Roll is designed to provide additional balance, in addition to knowledge and information and prioritization of bike and pedestrian vehicle speed conflict with traffic calming? Even as our population needs. Other avenues where this occurs is the PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) Conservation Landscape Program, which in our region is the Lehigh Valley grows, how can we mitigate congestion with traffic-calming measures Greenways. This looks at the system of trails with our many partners, such as Northampton County, Lehigh County, the cities of Allentown, Bethlehem and Easton and a lot of non-profits such as that don't increase overall traffic volume? the Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor and Wildlands Conservancy. This promotes off-road system connections with the on-road system connections. Our population is growing, and the one category of the draft TIP that addresses congestion management and ties into safety is the Automation and Technological Advancement piece, which includes the Bath Borough Signalization project. This project will connect all the traffic signals for greater efficiency of traffic flows, where state roadways throughput a significant amount of vehicle and truck traffic into a small borough. The surrounding townships are developing and have created increased congestion within the Borough, caused from residential and industrial growth. Smart technologies that are automated and understand high periods of congestion, where the signals are timed to allow the traffic to move through those areas, will reduce idle time and improve air quality. About a year and a half ago, the LVPC worked with Bath Borough to do an assessment of walking and biking facilities and some traffic-calming measures that could be simultaneously installed with these Coalition for Appropriate improvements with automation and technology. Transportation Scott Slingerland 5/20/2020 8 Why is Northampton County Bridge 15, aka the Meadows Road The Meadows Road Bridge is currently in the Preliminary Engineering phase, which is when professional engineers, environmentalists and historic preservationists look at all options for a Bridge, a 162 year historic stone arch bridge, that is up for transportation facility based on specific local conditions from endangered species potential to the condition of the bridge itself. This can be for design consideration and potential bridge consideration to be placed on the National Register of Historic places rehabilitation. The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for "Replacement/Rehabilitation", as the options for the future of the bridge are being torn down and not rehabbed? The township has asked the bridge open as necessitated by the Preliminary Engineering or discovery phase. be saved for use as a pedestrian bridge and a new bridge be located Public Comment Stephanie Brown 5/20/2020 9 elsewhere.
56 I came across a post (https://www.lvpc.org/tip.html) on LinkedIn Thank you for your comment. It is the goal of LVTS to promote a sustainable and efficient multimodal transportation network for the Lehigh Valley. Mobility, accessibility and safety performance yesterday which highlighted the Lehigh Valley TIP and was very excited targets have been established by the LVTS that are monitored and publicly reported upon for assessment of the progress towards achieving objective goals by both the Commonwealth and our to see the investment that’s being made towards improving all things federal government. transportation in the Lehigh Valley. As the Account Executive for Commute with Enterprise, the Lehigh Valley is part of the territory I oversee and is an area I’ve spent considerable time traveling to and through prior to having to telecommute due to COVID.
Despite the impact of the pandemic on the transportation industry, we’ve continued to deliver new vanpool vehicles and have found that we are being called upon more to help our transit partners, both existing and new, to navigate these uncertain times.
After reviewing the projects in the TIP and the estimated funding associated with them, I am encouraged by the amount of investment and think incorporating a contracted vanpool program could achieve your goals at an increasingly efficient use of taxpayer dollars. Vanpool programs also contribute to the generation of federal formula funding, also at an increasingly efficient rate due to the low passenger mile per operating expense ratio. Therefore, incorporating vanpool as a mode in your growing transportation system could improve overall performance of your system and reach populations not currently serviced.
Public Comment William Whiteside 5/20/2020 10 Under bridges, the Meadows Road Bridge is listed as replacement, not The TIP is a 4-year funding investment program for the enhancement of transportation network. The TIP is a funding program, so specifically allocating federal and/or state transportation dollars repair. towards a project. It does not dictate the treatment or solution to the transportation issue. Currently, the bridge is not able to carry vehicles but that does not mean it lacks historic or cultural value. The historic and cultural value are assessed through the Preliminary Engineering phase as part of a federally-defined process known as a Section 106 review. Ultimately, the State and County will determine what happens with the bridge itself. I hope this clears up your concern interpretation related to the draft TIP. The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for "Replacement/Rehabilitation," as the design outcome of the project is still to be determined. Public Comment Anonymous 5/20/2020 11 Please note it states replacement of the Meadows Road Bridge. Thank you for your comment. The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for "Replacement/Rehabilitation," as the design outcome of the Public Comment Anonymous 5/20/2020 12 project is still to be determined. Bridge 15 is a beautiful and historic bridge which should be preserved (See Responses to Questions 9, 11 and 12). The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for "Replacement/Rehabilitation." or restored. Please reconsider. Anyone who lives in the area could tell you there's a high need for dedicated pedestrian access at this point between the sv rail trail and retail on Main Street/412. It seems there could be several options that would better suit needs in this area than Public Comment Mary Terp 5/23/2020 13 replacing this bridge. Save the Meadows Road Bridges connect us across space or water, but also across time. The Thank you for your comment. (See Response to Questions 9, 11 and 12). The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for Bridge community Facebook Meadows Road Bridge (a 2020 #PAatRisk) could be repaired rather "Replacement/Rehabilitation." Public Comment page 5/23/2020 14 than replaced. Save the Meadows Road It's disappointing to know that a 162-year-old historic bridge in Lower (See Responses to Question 9, 11 and 12) The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for "Replacement/Rehabilitation." Bridge community Facebook Saucon, Northampton County may be lost due to TIP funded Public Comment page 5/23/2020 15 replacement project. Map #70: Meadows Road Bridge, Lower Saucon Township Please (See Responses to Question 9, 11 and 12) Thank you for your comment. The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for repair/rehabilitate and preserve the Meadows Road Bridge. "Replacement/Rehabilitation." Public Comment Frank Lucas 5/24/2020 16 Why is the historic Meadows Road Bridge listed on this as replacement (See Responses to Question 9, 11 and 12) Thank you for your comment. The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for when Lower Saucon Township has asked that this bridge be saved and "Replacement/Rehabilitation." repaired? It is also now up for consideration to be placed on the National Register of Historic places in June. Public Comment Stephanie (First name only) 5/27/2020 17 Map #52 Indian Trail Bridge appears to have erroneous entries in the Thank you for locating this error. The draft TIP has been amended with updated data. There is no Preliminary Engineering programmed for the Indian Trail Bridge and the erroneous data does not Public Comment Anonymous 5/27/2020 18 Preliminary Design row affect actual project costs or funding totals.
57 Why is Northampton County Executive Lamont McClure claiming his First, some background on the basis of the issue: The rules of federal funding. The US Government sets parameters for the use of transportation dollars and requires a transparent project selection county is getting slighted in transportation projects? process that must be approved by the LVTS, Commonwealth Department of Transportation and the US Department of Transportation. The TIP project selection process must be consistent with a limited amount of funds that are apportioned to the region, which directly affects the total amount of funding as well as the types of projects that can receive funding through various federal funding formula programs. These programs set limitations to the type of investments that federal money may be apportioned to certain projects, such as the National Highway Performance Program or the Highway Safety Improvement Program. Additional federal requirements include metrics that are outlined by Congress, prioritizing which projects must be designed to accomplish specific goals for the region and our state. Our federal senators and representatives, as well as those on the state level, set policy direction and allocate funds towards transportation projects and there are certain requirements attached. This sets parameters where money can and cannot be spent. Because of federal rules and regulations, limits on the amount of funding available and how funding timelines work, it’s not a situation where the TIP and those who represent it, such as Executive McClure, Executive Armstrong, PennDOT, LANTA, LNAA, the three city mayors and the LVPC, get a pool of money where you can divide the total by political boundaries. The LVTS is actively trying to address the global concerns of local control of the funds, which is reflected in FutureLV: The Regional Plan, our locally adopted bi-county comprehensive plan and long-range transportation plan. An integral step in project selection includes a open Call for Projects, that occurred over a year ago. There were a lot of projects already under construction from the current TIP and even previous TIPs that must be completed before new projects can fit into the funding budget. Through the leadership of Executive McClure and Executive Armstrong, we were able to help tie county planning, such as land use, environmental, farm land preservation, housing, economic, and balance them with the transportation program. Over the long-range, this should help bring more local control back to the TIP while still trying to meet the requirements of the federal and state governments. Another good point Executive McClure made was that we need more money. We see the project list and what could not be funded on the four-year program and the need outweighs the available funding. This is nationwide issue with the availability of transportation funds, as well as a region one. Only Congressional action at both the federal and state governments can change this. Collectively we need to address this issue as a region and advocate for our federal and state governments to allocate more to our rapidly growing region. When the state markets our region for industrial and freight development, those developments should be matched with infrastructure needed to support them. This is very important to the overall dialogue of trying to keep our region working and safe and healthy. The desire by the entire LVTS is to maintain control of how funding is allocated, and not only going to larger road and bridge projects, but distributed more equitably to the local system to support our counties and local governments. Public Comment Anonymous 5/27/2020 19 When will the "missing link" of the D&L Trail near Allentown be The LVPC, along with over 13 partners, just submitted a $24 million BUILD grant application to the US Department of Transportation titled Build Riverside Drive. The grant application would completed? contribute to a Public-Private Partnership established along a critical portion of the Delaware & Lehigh Trail and help transform a 3.5-mile project that will create a robust, multimodal commuting corridor stretching from the City of Allentown through Whitehall Township that will ultimately contribute to closing a trail gap which is part of the 9-11 National Memorial Trail. More information and Public Comment Anonymous 5/27/2020 20 support for the program can be found at www.https://www.buildriversidedrive.com/ Just got finished with the LVPC meeting regarding TIP funding. My (See Response to Questions 9, 11 and 12) The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for "Replacement/Rehabilitation." question regarding the Meadows Road Bridge was partially addressed. It was stated that the bridge will never be opened to vehicle traffic We were unaware of any technology-related concerning the public meeting that you attended and the link provided in the public media notice is tested and correct. The Pennsylvania Sunshine Act again and that replacement does not necessarily mean it will be torn was established to ensure that all public comments are addressed, and your comment has been recorded and will be integrated to the LVTS decision-making process for the 2021-2024 TIP. In down. The preliminary engineering study has yet to be completed. This addition to the three public meetings provided, the LVTS provided several open portals to submit questions, concerns and comments regarding the draft TIP list. These include: www.lvpc.org, the is the first time this has been publicly stated regarding the bridge not LVPC Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and LinkedIn pages. Comments, questions and concerns may also be sent to the LVPC office at 961 Marcon Blvd, Suite 310, Allentown, PA 18109 or emailed being able to be fixed or opened to traffic ever again. I did get a to [email protected]. You may also call the LVPC office at (610) 264-4544. message about not being able to get access to the meeting through the link. I believe the directions in the article to attend the meeting were incorrect and incomplete and I took them from an article on Lehigh Valley Live. I also believe the LVPC was in violation of the Sunshine Save the Meadows Road Act. I left the meeting and could not get back in for a good 5 minutes. I Bridge community Facebook will be following up personally with a phone call. Public Comment page 5/27/2020 21 Please explain where this decision came from and who made the (See Response to Questions 9, 11 and 12) The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for "Replacement/Rehabilitation." decision that this bridge can never carry vehicular traffic again because it's the first time that anyone has heard that. I was shocked the other day when I attended the meeting to hear that statement. If that's the case and no suitable spot can be found for a new bridge, then the bridge will most likely be torn down. I invite you and the LVPC to reach out to Lower Saucon Township officials and even invite you to a public meeting. Sadly, the County of Northampton has remained quiet on this Save the Meadows Road subject and the County and the township seem to be going in two Bridge community Facebook opposite directions with this bridge. Public Comment page 5/27/2020 22 Who did the study? Where is it and is it a public document that can be (See Reponses to Questions 9, 11 and 12) Preliminary engineering is on-going and therefore no determination as to the future of the bridge has been made. This is a Northampton County-owned given to the township? I have been advocating for this bridge for 15 bridge, you will need to contact Northampton County for more information. years and this is the first time I have ever heard this. Is this a Public Comment 5/27/2020 23 PennDOT study? Please save the Meadows Road Bridge! Please repair but do NOT (See Reponses to Questions 9, 11 and 12) The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for "Replacement/Rehabilitation." Public Comment Jason Hoffman 5/30/2020 24 replace it. Leave it be. Save a price of history. Don’t tear down the Meadows Road Bridge! (See Reponses to Questions 9, 11 and 12) The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for "Replacement/Rehabilitation." Public Comment Corrie Hanson 5/30/2020 25 Meadow Road bridge needs to be saved and not scrapped. Keep the (See Reponses to Questions 9, 11 and 12) The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for "Replacement/Rehabilitation." Public Comment Robert Hoffman 5/30/2020 26 meadows road bridge! Meadows Road Bridge yesterday was preliminary approved to be (See Reponses to Questions 9, 11 and 12) The bridge plan within the LVTS Transportation Improvement Program has been amended to be listed for "Replacement/Rehabilitation." If the bridge is added to the National Registry for Historic Sites yesterday by PHMC. approved for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, there are federal guidelines in both the National Environmental Protection Act and the National Historic Preservation Act that would Public Comment Anonymous 6/3/2020 27 How will this affect status? govern how the bridge could be treated and the options for that. The TIP is a funding program not a design decision plan for any project. I'm very wary of capacity increasing projects. Of course the Highway capacity adding projects certainly have propensity to induce demand, however capacity increasing projects like smart signal corridors that add enhancements to pedestrians, bicyclists and professional association (engineers) that will greatly benefit from more other non-motorized forms of transportation, support mobility for Americans with disabilities and connections to transit provide great benefits. Smart technology and infrastructure that allows for infrastructure spending supports the idea. $$$ “learning” vehicles patterns and adjusting signal timing can improve the safety of our transportation system and reduce congestion. Further investments to alternative modes choices from single- occupancy vehicles also allow for greater access and support a truly multi-modal transportation system. These are all examples of capacity adding projects that make all forms of traffic flow more Public Comment Anonymous 6/8/2020 28 efficiently. It’s proven that widening roads does not alleviate traffic, but adds There are no highway widening projects in the draft 2021 TIP, however there are millions of dollars allocated for bike, pedestrian, ADA accessibility and safety projects which may be are classified more. It’s called induced demand. We have to be smart about as capacity adding for multi-modal, safety, and modernization projects. These are designed to reduce conflicts across modes and make it safer for people overall. The 2021 TIP Made Easy guide planning, which doesn’t include widening already burdensome available on the lvpc.org website provides resources explaining the decision-making process for a truly multimodal system. Priorities for investments in Traffic Management Technologies were highways to take up even more precious space with little reward. more than double that of roadway expansion projects, while pedestrian facilities, multi-use trails and bicycle facilities were allocated more than $8.5 million in investments as well. In addition, there Public Comment Anonymous 6/8/2020 29 Enabling sprawl isn’t the answer. are times when adding roadway capacity is needed, as a region grows this becomes a greater need.
58 These are projects we believe are necessary, such as widening parts The Route 22 bridge was structurally deficient and reconstructed to modern standards including width for emergency services. Additional capacity for future needs has to be included in the design of of Route 22, improving Route 33 and repairing roads and intersections a major bridge with a 50-75 year lifespan such as the one in the picture with more than 100,000 vehicles per day. in towns across the region, yet based on the funding we expect to have, we can’t find a way to fund them even in the back end of a 25- year plan. This is what I was referring to, along with the image chosen to go along with this article being an expansion of Route 22. I do agree that new means of funding will be necessary though, especially as we move away from reliance on gas fueled vehicles. Public Comment Anonymous 6/8/2020 30 I'm not sure the State Route 309 Center Valley Interchange should be Thank you for your comment. This area has been identified by PennDOT as a priority congestion reduction project due to peak Travel-Time Index data that supports consideration of project design a top priority. improvements. Travel Time Index is a ratio of congestion and delay during typical commuting hours of the day compared to the free-flow design times that road segments provide at non-peak Public Comment Jill Hirt 6/9/2020 31 hours. Based on projects delays, this has been deemed a regional priority. All bridges large and small should be first priority Bridges are a priority for the region as noted by the variety and number of bridge projects included in the draft TIP. If more money becomes available this will increase the number of bridge projects Public Comment Bruce McIntosh 6/9/2020 32 that can be done. Let's crowdfund a rail connector to New Jersey Transit. If a young lady Thank you for your comment. The LVTS and Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority (LANTA) work closely to collaborate on planning, programming and funding public transit projects can raise $23 million because her dog died, we should consider it an that enhance the mobility of transit riders within the Lehigh Valley. Currently, the LVTS and LANTA have identified a Bus Rapid Transit/Enhanced Bus routing system that will serve as an express option to get the $350 million needed to make it happen. service system along the most-heavily traveled commuter corridors in the Lehigh Valley, as designated in the Centers & Corridors concept within FutureLV: The Regional Plan. The goals and objectives for establishing a Bus Rapid Transit/Enhanced Bus system are focused on benefiting current riders, expanding the transit market by attracting new riders, promoting revitalization to the Valley's urban core, and maximizing the ridership by hours of service all through a financially feasible plan. FutureLV, which plans for the region's needs for 25 years and beyond, envisions Bus Public Comment David Kordi 6/9/2020 33 Rapid Transit as a precursor to passenger rail. The South Whitehall Township Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission offer the following comments on the 2021-2024 Transportation Improvement Program. Therefore, we are very interested in coordinating our plans with the LVTS/LVPC. We observe Christina 'Tori' Morgan and that there are a number of projects that are in or very close to our LVPC transportation planning staff will be coordinating with PennDOT Central Office and PennDOT District 5-0 to pursue plans that have been programmed for 2021 TIP construction in order to South Whitehall Township William H. MacNair 6/10/2020 34 Township. ensure that all concerned parties are addressed during the planning process. Regarding State Route 309 and Tilghman Street - This is a key project Christina 'Tori' Morgan and in a rapidly developing area. One of three north/south routes in South (See Response to Question 34) The LVTS has identified this area as a priority investment project and will continue to work with PennDOT and regional partners, including the Township, in a South Whitehall Township William H. MacNair 6/10/2020 35 Whitehall collaborative manner to address concerns from the public. The following are major east/west routes: - Rt 22 resurfacing from Rt 309 to I-18 split Christina 'Tori' Morgan and - Rt 22 resurfacing from 15th Street to MacArthur Road The LVTS has identified US Route 22 as a priority investment project and will continue to work with PennDOT and regional partners, including the Township, in a collaborative manner to address South Whitehall Township William H. MacNair 6/10/2020 36 - Rt 22 resurfacing from 15th Street to Rt 309 concerns. Regarding the Cedar Crest Boulevard Signal improvements - This is in Christina 'Tori' Morgan and Salisbury Township and is the second of 3 key North/South routes in The LVTS has identified this area as a priority investment project and will continue to work with PennDOT and regional partners, including the Township, in a collaborative manner to address South Whitehall Township William H. MacNair 6/10/2020 37 South Whitehall concerns. Christina 'Tori' Morgan and Regarding Mauch Chunk Road Signal Upgrade - This is the third of The LVTS has identified this area as a priority investment project and will continue to work with PennDOT and regional partners, including the Township, in a collaborative manner to address South Whitehall Township William H. MacNair 6/10/2020 38 three North/South Routes in South Whitehall concerns. Christina 'Tori' Morgan and Regarding the Kernsville Road Bridge - This is located in North The LVTS has identified this area as a priority investment project and will continue to work with PennDOT and regional partners, including the Township, in a collaborative manner to address South Whitehall Township William H. MacNair 6/10/2020 39 Whitehall and is a key minor east/west route. concerns from the public. The 309 Betterment North of Route 22 was on the most recent TIP and Christina 'Tori' Morgan and continues to be a key project in a rapidly growing areas. This is one of The LVTS has identified this area as a priority investment project and will continue to work with PennDOT and regional partners, including the Township, in a collaborative manner to address South Whitehall Township William H. MacNair 6/10/2020 40 3 North/South routes in South Whitehall concerns. The Covered Bridge on Lapp Road was on the TIP several years ago. Christina 'Tori' Morgan and The project shut down the bridge. This bridge helps keep local traffic South Whitehall Township William H. MacNair 6/10/2020 41 off Cedar Crest Boulevard and Rt 309 Thank you for your comment. One of the larger projects included here is the Amazon off-site improvements at a cost of $5 million. If these improvements are necessitated by Amazon’s presence why is this the taxpayer’s responsibility? We should be seeking more money from the developer. As well, I would like to see the plan try to address more of the bottleneck intersections in the Lehigh Valley especially those where there a fair number of accidents. In my community I know the intersection of Route 191 and Newburg Road is one example. Economic policies and equity in funding distribution to investments that provide proportional benefits to communities of disadvantage are of concern of both the LVTS and LVPC. The scope of Improving those types of intersections improve safety, which results in project funding for Amazon Off-site Improvement project consists of intersection signalization improvements along State Route 1002 (Main Street) that will provide greater Intelligent Transportation financial savings for motorists, law enforcement and potentially System benefits beyond the Amazon property land development. The off-site improvements, will also provide greater efficiency and flow of all traffic in this region, not just Amazon freight. E- protects against the loss of life. I think this proposal could be more Commerce and its subsidiaries have fundamentally changed the freight and transportation network to the region and planning investments must be made as a partnership as society relies on balanced between these types of intersection improvements and road mobility of people and goods across modes. These bottleneck issues are also identified throughout the region by the LVTS and have been considered for design consideration throughout the resurfacing projects. Thank you. Lehigh Valley by PennDOT District 5-0 highway and bridge engineers. The intersection of Route 191 and Newberg Road is an excellent example for inclusion into future TIP project programming. Public Comment Adam McGlynn 6/10/2020 42 This intersection has been identified by the LVTS and PennDOT, and will be pursued in the future for construction improvements by potential project funding reserves or potential line item funding. There are enough north-south roads in the Valley. Route 22 is the only Funding new capacity adding projects and increasing the amount of assets which require more capital and time to maintain is not currently a priority, primarily because there simply isn't enough east-west highway for local commuting. More emphasis should be funding for every project and the anticipated funding is being focused on maintaining the network we have and making it more efficient. This is an issue not only for the Lehigh Valley, but across the placed on widening Route 22 or creating another East-west Route. state and nation. Instead, projects that reduce congestion, assist in greater efficiency of our existing network, promote alternative modes of transportation and implement a safer, intelligent Public Comment Anonymous 6/11/2020 43 transportation solutions have been identified as alternatives to creating more infrastructure to maintain. Widening is proven to not reduce congestion. This is that old definition of sanity thing. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting Public Comment Anonymous 6/11/2020 44 different results. Thank you for your comment. Induced demand has been identified as an issue with capacity adding projects. Route 22 is a problem and has been for years. I'm not sure that creating communities where people can live and work will solve the Thank you for your comment. The LVTS is committed to promoting solutions to everyday problems in a long-range planning effort as well as short-term solutions where applicable. As noted, this Public Comment Anonymous 6/11/2020 45 more immediate need. matter is not something that was created nor can be fixed with short-term solutions.
59 I think something needs to change with Route 22. I do find it interesting The widening and interchange improvements to Route 22 have been identified as a priority series of future network investment projects. While future Route 22 investment projects have been that I don't experience the same back-ups on Interstate 78. Does 78 delayed due to limited funds available for projects to our region, future efforts will be made to reinstate the programming when funds have been allocated to the region. As a result, the Route 22 get busy? Yes. However, I don't experience the same situation 22 widening project is on hold. presents on a regular basis. I do believe lane expansion would help 22. I think other work, such as exit redesigns might help too, but I do believe that trying to fit too many cars on the highway that exists is a Public Comment Anonymous 6/11/2020 46 real problem I commute east to west every day on I-78, unless of course there is an The undertaking of widening Route 22 began with the replacement of the Lehigh River Bridge and the Fullerton Interchange. While future Route 22 investment projects have been delayed due to accident or something. As for widening Route 22, my grandfather limited funds available for projects to our region, future efforts will be made to reinstate the programming when funds have been allocated to the region. As a result, the Route 22 widening project is pushed for that when he was on the planning commission in the 80's. on hold. You can see we haven't made much progress there. Public Comment Anonymous 6/11/2020 47 Route 22 is a very unique situation and needs a unique answer. My idea would be to build an upper level highway above the current highway for light vehicle traffic (up to 5 ton rated) while heavier vehicles be restricted to the lower level. For the upper level only 3 exits to get down to the lower level, between 309 and Cedar Crest, between 15th Street and MacArthur Road, between the Lehigh River bridge and Airport Road. The beginning of the upper level would be between Route 33 and Route 191 and the end would be between the turnpike Thank you for your suggestion. LVTS and PennDOT are working to provide transportation network solutions that are both financially feasible and reduce the amount of additional infrastructure. As Public Comment Anonymous 6/11/2020 48 and I-78. funding opportunities arise, LVTS and PennDOT will cooperatively and continually discuss alternatives for reducing congestion along Route 22. Are there statistics or info that report how much crime is increased from linked trails that go possibly hundreds of miles exits as opposed Public Comment Anonymous 6/11/2020 49 to being just in communities? While LVTS has not ventured into such studies, the FHWA and Rails-to-Trails Conservancy are two resources that provide information on design of safe and operable trails throughout our nation. Stop building warehouses. Focus our economy away from commuting to work in other regions. Build live work communities. Thank you for your comment. Warehouse development is a product of land use regulations at the local or municipal level. LVTS and LVPC staff work with the Lehigh Valley community Public Comment Anonymous 6/11/2020 50 representatives in order to promote and actively plan for responsible infrastructure investments that limit adverse impacts from traffic patterns and transportation network design changes. Once again, I see nothing on the Route 22 projects that will enhance the lives of the folks that live along the corridor. The noise level has dramatically increased in the Biery's Bridge Road neighborhood, due both to increased traffic AND the construction of buildings on the north side of the road, making an effective sound barrier on one side that reflects even more sound to the south side. There are hundreds of homes impacted by the noise from this section. Money would be better spent on quality of life issues like these, rather than a smooth road-- where there is absolutely no impact on either safety or congestion. In fact a bumpy road may serve to make folks slow down a bit more! So, my feedback is if your projects don't impact safety or reduce congestion, my tax dollars would be better spent on making the folks Thank you for your comment. The LVTS actively sought out projects from potential sponsors for projects eligible for federal funding opportunities by interested parties during its Open Call for who have to listen to this road have a better experience. thanks. Projects period in preparation of the long-range transportation plan selection process. Identifying projects for a long-range transportation plan funding eligibility and recognition of future TIP programming is an integral step in eventual project construction and improvements. Please consider your proposed improvement plan for sponsorship and inclusion in the next round of Call for Public Comment Elia Schoomer 6/11/2020 51 Projects. In a nutshell, trucks and warehouses are synonyms as well as Public Comment Anonymous 6/15/2020 52 symptoms. Thank you for your comment. In reference to the D+L Gap Closure: Will this proposed roadway be If the proposed 3.5-mile Riverside Drive project received funding through grants, public-private partnership, etc. it will be an all vehicle roadway south of Route 22 only. The entire length of the open to all vehicles including trucks? roadway includes bike, pedestrian and rolling accommodations. This project is contingent on award of additional federal dollars through the BUILD Grant program and is not funded through the Public Comment Anonymous 6/15/2020 53 Transportation Improvement Program. More information may be found at www.buildriversidedrive.com. A request was made to upgrade Route 222 to a 4 four-lane Limited Thank you for your concerns and comment. The Route 222 roadway was identified and selected as a Roadway Expansion project from the Berks County line to the Trexlertown Bypass in FutureLV: Access Highway The Regional Plan. Therefore, this Long-Range Transportation project was identified by both the LVTS as a priority and is anticipated to be addressed if funding is available from federal and state Public Comment Anonymous 6/15/2020 54 sources between 2031-2045.
60
RESOLUTION 7-8-2020-A 2021 – 2024 AIR QUALITY
RESOLUTION of the Lehigh Valley Transportation Study Metropolitan Planning Organization (LVTS MPO) to certify conformity of the 2021–2024 Transportation Improvement Program ((TIP) in Accordance with the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
WHEREAS, the Congress of the United States enacted the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 which was signed into law and became effective on November 15, 1990, hereafter referred to as “the CAAA”; and
WHEREAS, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under the authority of the CAAA, has defined the geographic boundaries for areas that have been found to be in non-attainment with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone, carbon monoxide and particulate matter; and
WHEREAS, effective July 20, 2012, the LVTS MPO area was designated under the 2008 eight- hour ozone standard as a non-attainment area by EPA; and
WHEREAS, effective December 14, 2009, the LVTS MPO area was designated under the 2006 PM2.5 24-hour NAAQS as a non-attainment area by EPA; and
WHEREAS, effective April 13, 2015 the LVTS MPO area was redesignated as an attainment area under the 2006 PM2.5 24-hour NAAQS with an approved Maintenance State Implementation Plan that includes motor vehicle emission budgets; and
WHEREAS, the transportation plans and programs are required to conform to the purposes of the State Implementation Plan and Sections 174 and 176 (c and d) of the CAAA (42 U.S.C. 7504, 7506 (c and d)); and
WHEREAS, the EPA issued the Final Rule on Transportation Conformity on November 24, 1993 for transportation plans and programs and projects; and
WHEREAS, the EPA amended the Final Conformity Rule various times between 1996 and the present; and
WHEREAS, the LVTS MPO is responsible for the development of transportation plans and programs in accordance with Section 134 of Title 23, which requires coordination and public participation with the State DOT; and
WHEREAS, the final conformity rule (and subsequent amendments) requires that the LVTS MPO Policy Board determines that the transportation plans and programs conform within the CAAA requirements by meeting the criteria described in the final guidelines.
61
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Lehigh Valley MPO Technical Committee has found that 2021–2024 TIP contribute to the achievement and maintenance of the NAAQS and is consistent with the final conformity rule issued on November 24, 1993 and subsequent amendments.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the LVTS Coordinating Committee found that 2021–2024 TIP contribute to the achievement and maintenance of the NAAQS and is consistent with the final conformity rule issued on November 24, 1993 and subsequent amendments.
I hereby certify that this Resolution was adopted by the LVTS Technical and Coordinating Committees at its joint meeting on July 8, 2020.
ATTEST:
By:______By:______
Christopher Kufro, PE, Chair Michael W. Rebert, PE, Chair LVTS Technical Committee LVTS Coordinating Committee
By:______
Becky A. Bradley, AICP, Secretary LVTS Technical and Coordinating Committees
62
RESOLUTION: 7-8-2020-B 2021 – 2024 SELF-CERTIFICATION
RESOLUTION of the Lehigh Valley Transportation Study Metropolitan Planning Organization (LVTS MPO) to certify that the metropolitan transportation planning process is being carried out in accordance with all applicable federal requirements and that the local process to enhance the participation of the general public, including the transportation disadvantaged, has been followed in developing the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
WHEREAS, 23 CFR Part 450.336 specifies that, concurrent with submittal of the proposed TIP to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) as part of the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) approval, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) shall certify that the metropolitan transportation planning process is being carried out in accordance with all applicable requirements; and
WHEREAS, Sections 134 and 135 of Title 23 USC, 49 USC 5303-5304, and 23 CFR Part 450 set forth the national policy that the MPO designated for each urbanized area is to carry out a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive multimodal transportation planning process, including the development of a metropolitan transportation plan and a TIP and establish policies and procedures for MPOs to conduct the metropolitan planning process; and
WHEREAS, the TIP continues to be financially constrained as required by 23 CFR Part 450.324 and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) policy on the documentation of financial capacity, published in FTA Circular 7008.1A; and
WHEREAS, the requirements of Sections 174 and 176(c) and (d) of the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 USC 7504, 7506(c) and (d)) and 40 CFR Part 93 have been met for non-attainment and maintenance areas; and
WHEREAS, the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended (42 USC 2000d-1) and 49 CFR Part 21; 49 USC 5332, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, creed, national origin, sex or age in employment or business opportunity; The Older Americans Act, as amended (42 USC 6101), prohibiting discrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance; 23 USC Section 324, prohibiting discrimination based on gender; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 USC 794), the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 USC 12101 et seq.), and 49 CFR Parts 27, 28, and 29, regarding discrimination against individuals with disabilities have been met; and
63
WHEREAS, the requirements of Section 1101(b) of the FAST Act (Public Law 114-94) and 49 CFR Part 26 regarding the involvement of disadvantaged or minority business enterprises in FHWA funded planning projects and FTA funded projects have been met; and
WHEREAS, the provisions of 23 CFR Part 230, regarding the implementation of an equal employment opportunity program on Federal and Federal-aid highway construction contracts have been addressed; and
WHEREAS, the requirements of Executive Order 12898 (Federal Order to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations) have been met; and
WHEREAS, the provision of 49 CFR Part 20 prohibiting recipients of federal funds from using those funds for lobbying purposes has been met.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the LVTS MPO Technical Committee certifies that its metropolitan transportation planning process is being carried out in accordance with all applicable provisions of federal law and certifies that the local process to enhance the participation of the general public, including the transportation disadvantaged, has been followed in developing the region’s transportation plans and programs, including the Fiscal Federal Year (FFY) 2021-2024 TIP.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the LVTS MPO Coordinating Committee certifies that its metropolitan transportation planning process is being carried out in accordance with all applicable provisions of federal law and certifies that the local process to enhance the participation of the general public, including the transportation disadvantaged, has been followed in developing the region’s transportation plans and programs, including the FFY 2021- 2024 TIP.
I hereby certify that this resolution was adopted by the Lehigh Valley Transportation Study at its meeting on July 8, 2020.
64
ATTEST:
By:______By:______
Christopher Kufro, PE, Chair Michael W. Rebert, PE, Chair
LVTS Technical Committee LVTS Coordinating Committee
By:______Becky A. Bradley, AICP, Secretary
LVTS Technical and Coordinating
Committees
65 Transportation Management Area Planning Certification Review
Federal Highway Administration Lehigh Valley Federal Transit Administration Transportation Management Area
Photo credit: Lehigh Valley Economic Development Corporation
Final Report June 25, 2020
66
67
Table of Contents
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 3
1.1 Previous Findings and Disposition ...... 3
1.2 Summary of Current Findings ...... 3
2.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 7
2.1 Background ...... 7
2.2 Purpose and Objective ...... 8
3.0 SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY ...... 9
3.1 Review Process ...... 9
3.2 Documents Reviewed ...... 10
4.0 PROGRAM REVIEW ...... 11
4.1 Continuous, Cooperative, and Comprehensive Process – Documenting Roles and Processes ...... 11
4.2 Public Participation and Access to Information ...... 15
4.3 Civil Rights (Title VI and Limited English Proficiency (LEP)) ...... 18
4.4 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) ...... 20
4.5 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) / Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) ...... 22
4.6 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) ...... 27
4.7 Air Quality ...... 28
4.8 Transportation Safety ...... 30
4.9 Integrating Freight into the Transportation Planning Process ...... 31
4.10 Congestion Management Process / Management and Operations ...... 34
1
68
5.0 CONCLUSION ...... 37
APPENDIX A – CERTIFICATION REVIEW MEETING AGENDA ...... 38
APPENDIX B – STATUS OF FINDINGS FROM LAST REVIEW ...... 40
APPENDIX C – PARTICIPANTS ...... 42
APPENDIX D – PUBLIC COMMENTS ...... 44
APPENDIX E – LIST OF ACRONYMS...... 46
2
69
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On December 16-17, 2019, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) conducted a joint Certification Review of the transportation planning process for the Lehigh Valley urbanized area. The Certification Review meeting agenda is included as Appendix A. FHWA and FTA are required to jointly review and evaluate the transportation planning process for each urbanized area over 200,000 in population at least every four years to determine if the process meets the Federal planning requirements.
1.1 Previous Findings and Disposition
The first Certification Review for the Lehigh Valley urbanized area was conducted in 1994. This is the ninth Certification Review. The previous 2016 Certification Review findings and their disposition are provided in Appendix B.
1.2 Summary of Current Findings
The review team determined that the metropolitan transportation planning process conducted in the Lehigh Valley urbanized area meets the Federal planning requirements.
As a result of this review, FHWA and FTA are certifying the transportation planning process conducted by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT), Lehigh Valley Transportation Study (LVTS) and Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority (LANTA). There are also recommendations in this report that warrant close attention and follow-up, as well as areas where the MPO is performing very well and are to be commended.
3
70
Summary of Findings
Review Area Recommendation Commendation Continuous, The Review Team recommends the reciprocal The Review Team commends LVTS and Cooperative, and board seats between LANTA and LVTS be LANTA for their close coordination and Comprehensive adopted into the bylaws or otherwise designation of board seats for each 23 CFR 450.306(a)&(b) formalized so they are protected from any organization’s executive directors, as this 23 U.S.C. 134 (d) changes in leadership or organization encourages an integrated planning 23 CFR 450.314(a) priorities. approach. The Review Team recommends that the MPO The Review Team commends LVTS for strengthen committee member awareness, proactively engaging municipalities in the coordination and knowledge of associated regional LRTP update using one-on-one transportation planning activities by: phone call invitations. o Developing an orientation package for The Review Team commends LVTS for new Committee members; and developing DataLV, an online resource for o Distributing comprehensive meeting transportation data and maps. packages for the Coordinating and The Review Team commends LVTS for its Technical Committee meetings two participation and leadership on the weeks in advance. Metropolitan Area Planning (MAP) Forum.
Public Participation The Review Team recommends LVPC update The Review Team commends LVTS on its 23 U.S.C. 134(i)(6) its website to include a webpage translator to efforts to promote equality and fairness 23 CFR 450.316 & facilitate engagement opportunities for among participants and viewpoints through 450.326(b) Limited English Proficient (LEP) individuals. its public participation process. Civil Rights PennDOT will provide LVPC with technical Title VI Civil Rights Act, assistance on complaint procedure guidance 23 U.S.C. 324, and include development of an action plan by
LVPC to resolve the concerns identified herein. The Review Team recommends LVPC clearly communicate Title VI language in all public notices, specifically identifying “Title VI, its implementing regulations and other nondiscrimination authorities” in the text to ensure participants and beneficiaries are aware of the applicability of those authorities to the MPOs programs and activities. The Review Team recommends LVPC update its Public Participation Plan (PPP) and other public documents made available for review and comment to include a statement advising persons with visual impairments that the document may be obtained in alternative formats and the procedures to follow to obtain the documents.
4
71
Review Area Recommendation Commendation Transportation The Review Team recommends transit TIP The Review Team commends LVTS for Improvement narratives be expanded to demonstrate developing an easy-to-read TIP Program (TIP) compliance with Transit Asset Management Accomplishments Report for municipalities. 23 U.S.C. 134(c)(h)&(j) (TAM) requirements by using performance The Review Team commends LVTS for 23 CFR 450.326 based planning language and/or explanations publishing a TIP Made Easy report, which of how the project implements goals includes an introduction, public identified in the TAM Plan and Long Range participation overview, and high-level Transportation Plan (LRTP). project descriptions and costs. The Review Team commends LVTS for participating TIP update meetings and assisting with cost estimation in coordination with PennDOT District 5. Metropolitan The Review Team recommends LVTS The Review Team commends LVTS for the Transportation Plan strengthen future LRTP updates by including: readable, graphic format of the LRTP. 23 U.S.C. 134(c),(h)&(i) o An overview of the Interstate TIP within The Review Team commends LVTS and 23 CFR 450.324 the Lehigh Valley region; LANTA on the Coordinated Public Transit-
o An analysis of local Federal-aid routes Human Services Plan. The final product not and future needs; only meets the regulatory requirement, o Environmental mitigation strategies; and LANTA and LVTS chose to go beyond and o Stronger references to the Appendices create a product that that is also easily within the body of the LRTP. consumed and accessible to the public. The Review Team also strongly encourages The Review Team commends LVTS for the LVTS to proactively invite PennDOT to undertaking an Active Transportation participate in the LRTP update process to Master Plan. Walk/Roll LV emphasizes the identify and document PennDOT’s asset focus LVTS has placed on multimodal management conditions, strategies, and planning and meeting the transportation investment priorities to adequality maintain needs of the entire region. the region’s Interstate system. Unified Planning The Review Team commends LVTS for Work Program developing a user-friendly UPWP document 23 CFR 450.308 that allows for transparency in tracking major activities, tasks and budgets during the 2019 and 2020 state fiscal years. Air Quality The Review Team recommends LVTS The Review Team commends LVTS for Section 176(c)(1) of coordinate with PennDOT Central Office to being an active participant in the the Clean Air Act identify training and technical needs as it Pennsylvania Air Quality Work Group. 23 CFR 450.314(c) relates to MOVES modeling software. The Review Team commends LVTS for 23 CFR 450.314(e) 23 CFR 450.322(d) consistently completing past conformity 23 CFR 450.322(e) determinations in a timely matter. 23 CFR 450.324(d) EPA’s most recent review of the LVTS 2019- 23 CFR 450.324(f)(6) 2022 TIP and 2045 Long Range Plan met all 23 CFR 450.324(f)(9) the CAA requirements to allow approval of 23 CFR 450.324(m)
5
72
Review Area Recommendation Commendation 23 CFR 450.326(a) the conformity determinations per relevant 23 CFR 450.326(b) regulations. 23 CFR 450.326(f) 23 CFR 450.326(g)(5) 23 CFR 450.326(g)(6) 23 CFR 450.326(n)(2) 23 CFR 450.326(n)(3) Transportation Safety The Review Team recommends that the MPO The Review Team commends LVTS for and Operations have a more active role in the HSIP program by hosting community events to promote 23 CFR 450.306(a)(2) partnering with District 5-0 in identifying and bicycle and pedestrian safety as part of the 23 CFR 450.306(d) submitting HSIP projects; LVTS can facilitate Walk/Roll LV initiative. 23 CFR 450.324(f)(5) 23 CFR 450.324(h) this partnership by conducting an MPO safety 23 U.S.C. 134(h)(1)(B) review in collaboration with PennDOT, FHWA, 23 U.S.C. 134 (h)(1)(G) FTA, and other local stakeholders. 23 U.S.C. 134(i)(2)(D) 23 U.S.C. 134(k)(3) 23 CFR 450.322(f)(3) Integrating Freight The Review Team commends LVTS for into the Planning establishing and strengthening their freight Process program to include the creation of a freight advisory committee, supporting PennDOT with the administration and coordination of the Eastern Freight Summit in 2018, and being responsive to the needs of municipalities experiencing freight growth. Congestion The Review Team recommends LVTS Management Process strengthen future CMP updates by: 23 CFR 450.322 o Emphasizing freight trends and impacts o Analyzing and documenting implemented congestion management/mitigation measures to determine their effectiveness
Details of the findings for each of the above items are contained in this Report.
6
73
2.0 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Background
Pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 134(k) and 49 U.S.C. 5303(k), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) must jointly certify the metropolitan transportation planning process in Transportation Management Areas (TMAs) at least every four years. A TMA is an urbanized area, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau, with a population of over 200,000. After the 2010 Census, the Secretary of Transportation designated 183 TMAs – 179 urbanized areas over 200,000 in population plus four urbanized areas that received special designation. In general, the reviews consist of three primary activities: a site visit, a review of planning products (in advance of and during the site visit), and preparation of a Certification Review Report that summarizes the review and offers findings. The reviews focus on compliance with Federal regulations, challenges, successes, and experiences of the cooperative relationship between the MPO(s), the State DOT(s), and public transportation operator(s) in the conduct of the metropolitan transportation planning process. Joint FTA/FHWA Certification Review guidelines provide agency field reviewers with latitude and flexibility to tailor the review to reflect regional issues and needs. Therefore, the scope and depth of the Certification Review reports will vary significantly.
The Certification Review process is only one of several methods used to assess the quality of a regional metropolitan transportation planning process, compliance with applicable statutes and regulations, and the level and type of technical assistance needed to enhance the effectiveness of the planning process. Other activities provide opportunities for this type of review and comment, including Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) approval, the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP)/Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), metropolitan and statewide Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) findings, air-quality (AQ) conformity determinations (in nonattainment and maintenance areas), as well as a range of other formal and less formal contact provide both FHWA/FTA an opportunity to comment on the planning process. The results of these other processes are considered in the Certification Review process.
While the Certification Review report itself may not fully document those many intermediate and ongoing checkpoints, the “findings” of Certification Review are, in fact, based upon the cumulative findings of the entire review effort.
7
74
The review process is individually tailored to focus on topics of significance in each Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA). Federal reviewers prepare Certification Reports to document the results of the review process. The reports and final actions are the joint responsibility of the appropriate FHWA and FTA field offices, and their content will vary to reflect the planning process reviewed, whether or not they relate explicitly to formal “findings” of the review. To encourage public understanding and input, FHWA and FTA will continue to improve the clarity of the Certification Review reports.
2.2 Purpose and Objective
Since the enactment of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991, the FHWA and FTA, are required to jointly review and evaluate the transportation planning process in all urbanized areas over 200,000 population to determine if the process meets the Federal planning requirements in 23 U.S.C. 134, 40 U.S.C. 5303, and 23 CFR 450. The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) extended the minimum allowable frequency of Certification Reviews to at least every four years.
The Lehigh Valley Transportation Study (LVTS) is the designated MPO for the Allentown urbanized area. The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) is the responsible State agency and the Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority (LANTA) is the responsible public transportation operator. LANTA offers fixed route bus service with 28 routes serving Allentown and Bethlehem, as well as surrounding suburbs. LANTA also offers door-to-door, shared ride (or paratransit) service, available to riders in Lehigh and Northampton Counties who are registered and certified as eligible for sponsorship under various transportation funding programs.
The primary members of LVTS are the City of Allentown, City of Bethlehem, City of Easton, Lehigh County, Northampton County, LANTA, Lehigh-Northampton Airport Authority (LNAA), and PennDOT. The Lehigh Valley Planning Commission (LCPC) provides staff support to the MPO. The study area includes all the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton metropolitan area with the City of Allentown as the largest population center.
Certification of the planning process is a prerequisite to the approval of Federal funding for transportation projects in such areas. The review is also an opportunity to assist with new programs and enhance the ability of the metropolitan transportation planning process to provide decision-makers with the knowledge they need to make well-informed capital and operating investment decisions.
8
75
3.0 SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 Review Process
The Lehigh Valley TMA’s previous Certification Review was conducted in 2016. A summary of the status of findings from the last review is provided in Appendix B. This Report details the ninth review, which consisted of a desk review, on-site visit and a public involvement opportunity, conducted in December 2019. Participants in the review included representatives of FHWA PA Division, FTA Region III, PennDOT Central Office and the District 5 Engineering Office, LANTA, and LVPC staff. A full list of participants is included in Appendix C.
A desk review of current documents and correspondence was completed prior to the site visit. In addition to the formal review, routine oversight mechanisms provide a major source of information upon which to base the certification findings.
The Certification Review covers the transportation planning process conducted cooperatively by the MPO, State, and public transportation operators. Background information, current status, key findings, and recommendations are summarized in the body of the Report for the following subject areas selected by FHWA and FTA staff for the on-site review:
Continuous, Cooperative, and Comprehensive Process – Documenting Roles and Processes Public Participation and Access to Information Civil Rights (Title VI, Environmental Justice (EJ), Limited English Proficiency (LEP)) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) / Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) Performance Based Planning and Programming and Project Prioritization Multimodal and Transit Planning Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) Air Quality Conformity Safety Planning and Road Safety Audit Process Integrating Freight into the Transportation Planning Process Congestion Management Process (CMP) Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) and Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) Project Planning and Selection
9
76
3.2 Documents Reviewed
The following LVTS documents were evaluated as part of this planning process review:
LVTS Bylaws, staff organization chart, and committee structure Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and any documentation on the development process Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and TIP Development processes Documentation of MPO’s efforts to incorporate performance measures including Transportation Performance Measures (TPM), Transit Asset Management (TAM) targets and agreement, written provisions, and planning agreements Congestion Management Process (CMP) Bike and Pedestrian Plan Public Participation Plan (PPP) Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) and invoices from the most recent two quarters Equal Opportunity questionnaire Environmental Justice (EJ) Plan Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Plan MPO Bylaws and/or formal operational procedures Freight Plan and related freight planning information Any existing planning related Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)/Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) that LVPC has with LANTA, PennDOT, and/or other planning agencies FY 2018 Annual Listing of Obligated Projects Other pertinent MPO materials to showcase how the region conducts their 3-C planning process, including public outreach materials, visualization tools and other resources
10
77
4.0 PROGRAM REVIEW
4.1 Continuous, Cooperative, and Comprehensive Process – Documenting Roles and Processes
4.1.1 Regulatory Basis
23 CFR 450.306 (b) instructs MPOs to conduct the metropolitan planning process in a manner that is continuous, cooperative, and comprehensive, and provides for consideration and implementation of projects, strategies, and services. This is often referred to as the “3C” planning process.
23 U.S.C. 134(d) and 23 CFR 450.314(a) state that the MPO, the State, and the public transportation operator shall cooperatively determine their mutual responsibilities in carrying out the metropolitan transportation planning process. These responsibilities shall be clearly identified in written agreements among the MPO, the State, and the public transportation operator serving the planning area.
23 CFR 450.306 (a) requires metropolitan planning organizations, in cooperation with the State and public transportation operators, to develop LRTPs and TIPs through a performance-driven, outcome-based approach to planning for metropolitan areas of the State.
4.1.2 Current Status
The LVTS was established as the policy board to carry out the continuous, cooperative, and comprehensive transportation planning process to meet federal transportation planning regulations. The LVTS is comprised of two committees - the Technical Committee and Coordinating Committee. The Technical Committee is an advisory body to the Coordinating Committee, reviewing plans, programs, and various other items brought before them for review and recommendation to the Coordinating Committee. The Coordinating Committee is the policy body, which formally adopts items reviewed by the Technical Committee. The transit provider, LANTA, is represented as a voting member on both the Coordinating and Technical Committees.
The LVTS is supported by staff resources provided through the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission (LVPC) and is advised on technical matters by the Lehigh Valley Freight Advisory Committee and the Multimodal Working Group.
11
78
MPO Bylaws and Board Participation
Bylaws and standard operating procedures help an MPO implement the 3C planning process. LVTS maintains a set of bylaws entitled Lehigh Valley Area Transportation Study Agreement. The MPO staff provided the Review Team with a copy of the document as part of the desktop review. The Study Agreement describes the composition of voting members on the LVTS Coordinating and Technical Committees. It also broadly outlines the powers and duties of each Committee. Currently, the executive directors of LVPC and LANTA are represented voting members on each other’s respective policy boards. This arrangement has led to an integrated planning approach between LVTS and LANTA, which ensures collaboration and information sharing between the two agencies. Both LVTS and LANTA also participate actively in coordinated public engagement sessions. These roles are not required by either organizations’ bylaws.
At the on-site review, there was discussion of updating the current Study Agreement to accurately document the collaborative planning process and determine respective and mutual roles, responsibilities, and procedures governing their cooperative efforts in carrying out the federal and state required transportation planning process. LVTS staff noted the Coordinating and Technical Committees had experienced turnover in recent years and additional outreach and education was needed to help new members understand their role. Currently, Committee members are provided a copy of the Study Agreement and an organizational report that outlines annual planning activities completed by the agency. Given the broad nature of the current Study Agreement, the Review Team recommends LVTS update the document to formalize the roles and responsibilities of the Committee members. Additionally, the Review Team recommends LVTS develop a comprehensive orientation package for new Technical and Coordinating Committee members to introduce the MPO, outline what is expected from them as committee members, and describe where they fit in the regional transportation planning process.
As part of the MPO bylaws discussion, LVTS staff mentioned that there has been a significant increase in commuters traveling to the Lehigh Valley from Carbon and Schuylkill Counties. The Review Team suggests LVTS monitor new 2020 decennial Census data and update urbanized area boundaries, where needed. Should the urbanized area extend into a neighboring county(s), LVTS must update its Study Agreements to account for the new MPA boundary.
FHWA has provided subject matter expertise and technical assistance to numerous metropolitan and rural planning organizations (MPO/RPO) in the Commonwealth over the course of several years. This is usually needs-based and occurs due to FHWA’s active engagement in the
12
79
transportation planning process at the MPO and RPO level, enabling FHWA planners to assist their respective planning areas with best or noteworthy practices being advanced in other regions of the Commonwealth. Based on FHWA’s active participation with the LVTS, the Review Team recommends that the MPO strengthen committee member awareness and knowledge of associated transportation planning activities by offering comprehensive meeting packages for the Coordinating and Technical Committee meetings. There are several TMA-sized MPOs in PA that can be sampled to enhance meeting packages for the MPO. Areas such as the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) and the Harrisburg Area Transportation Study (HATS) place electronic MPO meeting packages on the web two weeks prior to scheduled meetings. The Lancaster County MPO staff develops meeting packets with technical memos detailing the issues under consideration by the MPO. This level of documentation allows MPO members sufficient time and information to review all materials for meetings and capture comments. These meeting packages contain all agenda item documentation that will be discussed during the meetings including the agenda, prior meeting minutes, fiscal constraint charts, transportation studies, agreements, and may include transportation press releases for member awareness.
Cooperative Transportation Planning Process
LVTS works closely with LANTA, PennDOT Central Office and PennDOT District 5 Office to identify transportation needs through planning studies and to program projects. The on-site review focused on the importance of the “3C” planning process and identified opportunities for LVTS, LANTA, and PennDOT to enhance this process and share information more proactively to ensure that decisions are made in a cooperative and comprehensive manner.
LVTS has long gathered and tracked a wealth of data as part of its land use and transportation planning efforts. In 2017, LVPC unveiled an online, interactive planning tool called DataLV to better inform regional stakeholders on trends in development, environment, social equity, and more. Transportation issues are a focus area within the DataLV website and the online tool allows users to learn more about daily traffic trends, commuting patterns, and alternative modes of transportation. The Review Team commends LVTS for developing and promoting DataLV as an accessible resource for transportation data, maps, and graphics.
To support an inclusive LRTP update process, LVTS engaged a variety of municipalities and key stakeholders as part of its open call-for-projects. LVPC’s robust comprehensive planning programs have enabled strong relationships to be created with their two Counties and various
13
80
municipalities. LVPC followed up via phone call with every municipality that did not RSVP to one of two informational sessions offered as part of the joint Comprehensive Plan and Long Range Transportation Plan update. The Review Team commends LVTS for proactively engaging municipal stakeholders in developing the LRTP and identifying local project needs.
Beyond the two-county region, LVTS is an active partner in the multi-state Metropolitan Area Planning (MAP) Forum. The MAP Forum is a consortium of nine MPOs from New Jersey, New York, Connecticut and Pennsylvania that have entered into an agreement to better coordinate planning activities in the multi-state region, especially freight planning in the northeast region. The investment that the participating MPOs have put into the MAP Forum has helped lead to robust ongoing coordination in several areas. The MAP Forum served as a vehicle for convening the Multi-State Freight Working Group, which has enabled LVTS and the other MPOs to provide freight project updates and address freight issues on a regional scale. This working group has been helpful as multi-state freight projects, such as I-84 improvements and Cross Harbor Freight Study, have been developed. The Review Team commends LVTS its participation and leadership on the MAP forum.
4.1.3 Findings
Commendation:
The Review Team commends LVTS and LANTA for their close coordination and designation of board seats for each organization’s executive directors, as this encourages an integrated planning approach. The Review Team commends LVTS for proactively engaging municipalities in the regional LRTP update using one-on-one phone call invitations. The Review Team commends LVTS for developing DataLV, an online resource for transportation data and maps. The Review Team commends LVTS for its participation and leadership on the MAP Forum.
Recommendations:
The Review Team recommends the reciprocal board seats between LANTA and LVTS be adopted into the bylaws or otherwise formalized so they are protected from any changes in leadership or organization priorities.
14
81
The Review Team recommends that the MPO strengthen committee member awareness, coordination and knowledge of associated transportation planning activities by: o Developing an orientation package for new Committee members; and o Distributing comprehensive meeting packages for the Coordinating and Technical Committee meetings two weeks in advance.
4.2 Public Participation and Access to Information
4.2.1 Regulatory Basis
Sections 134(i)(5), 134(j)(1)(B) of Title 23 and Section 5303(i)(5) and 5303(j)(1)(B) of Title 49, require MPOs to provide adequate opportunity for the public to participate in and comment on the planning processes and products. The requirements for public involvement are detailed in 23 CFR 450.316(a) and (b), which require the MPO to develop and use a documented participation plan that includes explicit procedures and strategies to include the public and other interested parties in the transportation planning process.
Specific requirements include: giving adequate and timely notice of opportunities to participate in or comment on transportation issues and processes, employing visualization techniques to describe metropolitan transportation plans and TIPs, making public information readily available in electronically accessible formats and means such as the world wide web, holding public meetings at convenient and accessible locations and times, demonstrating explicit consideration and response to public input, and periodically reviewing the effectiveness of the participation plan.
4.2.2 Current Status
The LVPC Public Participation Plan (PPP) was most recently adopted on October 4, 2017. In discussion with LVPC staff at the on-site review, changes made to the 2017 PPP were non- substantive. A comparison of the 2017 PPP to the February 2014 version revealed 689 changes within the text, most of which were insertions or replacements. The current PPP follows the same format as previous plans. The UPWP anticipates an updated PPP adoption on June 30, 2022; according to staff, an update to the PPP will begin in 2021.
15
82
Public Participation Plan
The 2017 PPP documents various approaches that LVPC uses to engage the public and interested parties in the planning process. These approaches include, but are not limited to: meetings which are open to the public and held in accessible locations; advertising in newspapers of general circulation; using email and mailing distribution lists; posting public service announcements with various media outlets and social-media platforms; and posting information to the LVPC website. LVPC provides opportunities to review and comment on the draft LRTP and TIP and includes a summary, analysis and report of disposition as an addendum to the appropriate document. LVPC also employs visioning strategies to convey information to the public on plans, programs and projects. Review and comment periods are consistent with regulatory requirements. When the final document of the LRTP or TIP differs significantly from the draft made available for public comment, LVPC provides an additional opportunity for public comment.
In addition to public outreach opportunities as part of the LRTP and TIP, LVPC provides opportunities for engagement in community forums including ‘Data & Donuts’ and ‘Policy & Pizza’ (Planning & Pizza). These efforts received a commendation at the 2016 Certification Review. Additionally, the LVPC holds “Strategy Labs”. The PPP describes the labs as “targeted topic-specific outreach meetings to gather public input on various planning-related issues.” According to the PPP, LVPC holds the Strategy Labs in addition to the public meeting requirements associated with review and comment periods.
LVPC evaluates the PPP biennially. The effectiveness of the PPP is based on PennDOT Performance Benchmarks and Public Involvement Questionnaire, as well as any revision to the planning rules. Socio-economic data is used to focus future public participation efforts. Public participation efforts are revised as necessary.
In addition to general involvement strategies, the PPP outlines specific strategies to engage and identify the needs of the traditionally underserved populations in the Lehigh Valley region. These strategies are aligned with the LVPC Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Plan, as well as strategies that include partnering activities with LANTA and PennDOT, as appropriate. The PPP addresses LVPC’s efforts to consult with Tribal Nations/Organizations that may have interests in plans and programs affecting the region. The MPO also conducts meetings, organized by staff, with groups that are traditionally underrepresented in the process to ensure opportunities exist for their input on transportation issues pertinent to each group. LVPC has identified non-English speaking media outlets and social service agencies with representative demographic
16
83
constituent groups to coordinate with in distributing information and planning materials to underserved populations.
The Review Team found that the MPO has established a strong base for the public involvement and identified opportunities to expand access. The PPP does not provide a notice to individuals with disabilities that the document may be obtained in alternative formats or how such alternative documents are obtained. Additionally, the PPP is not available in languages other than English nor does it provide instruction as to obtaining the document in other languages upon request. Moreover, neither the ‘Sample Public Notice’ or ‘Public Service Announcement’ includes these notices. Recommendations related to this issue are captured in the Civil Rights section 4.3.
Although the PPP provides an enumerated list of public outreach and involvement practices, the PPP is not organized in a way that facilitates the public’s understanding of when the opportunity to participate arises sequentially and in relation to what output. The Review Team encourages LVTS to reorganize its PPP document in a way that emphasizes public participation techniques and opportunities for participation by major MPO planning activity. The HATS MPO PPP provides an example of this suggested approach.
The LVPC website is located at www.lvpc.org. The website does not currently offer website translation nor does it provide information on how individuals can obtain documents, currently provided in .PDF format, in languages other than English. The Review Team recommends LVPC update its website to include a webpage translator to facilitate engagement opportunities for limited English proficient individuals. The MPO should reference the HATS website (https://www.tcrpc-pa.org/translation) as an example.
The Review Team also encourages LVPC to test its website for accessibility. Free testing tools for nongovernment websites are available at: https://www.gsa.gov/about- us/organization/office-of-the-chief-information-officer/office-of-deputy-cio/office-of- enterprise-planning-and-governance/enterprise-architecture-policy-planning/-section-508-and- accessibility/gsa-508-technical-tools-and-resources.
17
84
4.2.3 Findings
Commendations:
The Review Team commends LVPC on its efforts to promote equality and fairness among participants and viewpoints through its public participation process.
Recommendations:
The Review Team recommends LVPC update its website to include a webpage translator to facilitate engagement opportunities for Limited English Proficient (LEP) individuals.
4.3 Civil Rights (Title VI and Limited English Proficiency (LEP))
4.3.1 Regulatory Basis
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based upon race, color, and national origin. Specifically, 42 U.S.C. 2000d states that “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” In addition to Title VI, there are other Nondiscrimination statutes that afford legal protection. These statutes include the following: Section 162 (a) of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 (23 U.S.C. 324), Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973/Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. ADA specifies that programs and activities funded with Federal dollars are prohibited from discrimination based on disability.
Executive Order #13166 (Limited-English-Proficiency) requires agencies to ensure that limited English proficiency persons can meaningfully access the services provided consistent with and without unduly burdening the fundamental mission of each federal agency.
4.3.2 Current Status
Title VI
During the 2019 Transportation Planning Certification Review of LVTS, there were no active Title VI complaints issued against the MPO. Several documents that LVPC generates reference the MPO’s Title VI Complaint process, including the LEP Plan, meeting notices on the website, and the Title VI Public Notice. These sources ensure that the process and complaint form are publicly
18
85
available. The LEP Plan provides a copy of the Title VI process and complaint form as an Appendix. Additionally, LVPC indicates that the process is posted on its website. However, with the exception of the notation in the LEP Plan, the Review Team was unable to locate the information elsewhere. A similar observation was made during the 2016 Transportation Planning Certification Review.
A review of LVPC’s Title VI complaint process revealed that it is inconsistent with current guidance provided to PennDOT. Specifically, the Review Team observed that the process has not been revised to limit Title VI to only those protected classes to which the statute applies or to alternatively revise the process to be a nondiscrimination complaint process. Moreover, the Review Team found that the complaint form contains the same inconsistency with current guidance.
During the 2016 Transportation Planning Certification Review, it was noted that Title VI information, including implementing regulations, nondiscrimination statutes, and the applicability of those to the MPO’s programs and activities, was sparse. The Review Team observed the MPO did not explicitly provide statutory reference in meeting notices. Instead, the MPO generally references nondiscrimination authorities in legal and meeting notices.
As previously mentioned in the Public Participation Plan and Access Information section, the MPO’s website is not accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. The Review Team also observed that documents that require opportunities for public review and comment do not provide a translation mechanism for limited English persons. Similarly, the Review Team observed that the same documents lack sufficient notices to advise persons with vision impairments on how they may obtain the documents in accessible formats.
4.3.3 Findings
Recommendations:
PennDOT will provide LVPC with technical assistance on complaint procedure guidance and include development of an action plan by LVPC to resolve the concerns identified herein. The Review Team recommends LVPC clearly communicate Title VI language in all public notices, specifically identifying “Title VI, its implementing regulations and other
19
86
nondiscrimination authorities” in the text to ensure participants and beneficiaries are aware of the applicability of those authorities to the MPOs programs and activities. The Review Team recommends LVPC update its PPP and other public documents made available for review and comment to include a statement advising persons with visual impairments that the document may be obtained in alternative formats and the procedures to follow to obtain the documents.
4.4 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
4.4.1 Regulatory Basis
23 U.S.C. 134(c),(h) & (j) set forth requirements for the MPO to cooperatively develop a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Under 23 CFR 450.326, the TIP must meet the following requirements:
Must cover at least a four-year horizon and be updated at least every four years; Surface transportation projects funded under Title 23 U.S.C. or Title 49 U.S.C., except as noted in the regulations, are required to be included in the TIP; List project description, cost, funding source, and identification of the agency responsible for carrying out each project; Projects need to be consistent with the adopted MTP; Must be fiscally constrained; and The MPO must provide all interested parties with a reasonable opportunity to comment on the proposed TIP.
4.4.2 Current Status
TIP Development Process
At the on-site review, the Review Team asked questions regarding the 2019 TIP development process and enhancements planned for the current 2021 TIP cycle.
The Review Team commended the MPO for developing the TIP Made Easy report for their municipalities. This is a very clear, concise document that provides an introduction to transportation investments in the region, project prioritization and selection, and matrices containing highway, bridge, TIP development timeline, and transit projects identifying project location, project description, and fiscal year program information. To enhance the TIP Made Easy
20
87
document, the Review Team suggests that performance measure narrative and data be included in the body of the report to capture and illustrate how well the transportation system is performing in the region and help decision makers determine asset management current and future needs and investments. The Review Team also encourages LVTS strengthen the TIP Made Easy report by including narrative before each TIP category section to enhance the story of each topic area, such as safety, signalization improvements, etc.
Performance Based Planning and Programming and Project Prioritization
The Planning Regulations require a description of the anticipated effect of the TIP toward achieving the performance targets identified in the MTP, linking investment priorities to those targets [23 CFR 450.326(d)]. The Review Team could find no discussion of performance measures or targets in the TIP. When the TIP was adopted in June 2018, it should have at a minimum included discussion of the Safety Performance Measures (PM1). Page 3 of the TIP mentions the December 29, 2017 LVTS decision to support PennDOT Safety Target, but nothing further. With respect to transit investment, the Review Team recommends the Transit TIP narratives be expanded to demonstrate compliance with Transit Asset Management (TAM) requirements by using performance-based planning language and/or explanations of how the project advances the goals identified in the TAM plan and regional LRTP.
LVTS staff recognized the need to incorporate reference to all performance measures and targets whenever the TIP is amended or next updated. As previously mentioned, LVTS should build upon the successes in the TIP Made Easy Report and include performance measure data and narrative.
4.4.3 Findings
Commendation:
The Review Team commends LVTS for developing an easy-to-read TIP Accomplishments Report for municipalities. The Review Team commends LVTS for publishing a TIP Made Easy report, which includes an introduction, public participation overview, and high-level project descriptions and costs. The Review Team commends LVTS for participating in PennDOT TIP update meetings and assisting with cost estimation in coordination with PennDOT District 5.
21
88
Recommendations:
The Review Team recommends transit TIP narratives be expanded to demonstrate compliance with Transit Asset Management (TAM) requirements by using performance based planning language and/or explanations of how the project implements goals identified in the TAM Plan and LRTP.
4.5 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) / Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP)
4.5.1 Regulatory Basis
23 U.S.C. 134(c), (h) & (i) and 23 CFR 450.324 set forth requirements for the development and content of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP). In Pennsylvania, the MTP is often referred to as the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). Among the requirements are that the MTP address at least a 20-year planning horizon and that it includes both long and short term strategies that lead to the development of an integrated and multi-modal system to facilitate the safe and efficient movement of people and goods in addressing current and future transportation demand.
The MTP is required to provide a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive multimodal transportation planning process. The plan needs to consider all applicable issues related to the transportation systems development, land use, employment, economic development, natural environment, and housing and community development.
23 U.S.C. 134(i)(2)(D) and 23 CFR 450.324(f)(10) require environmental mitigation be set forth in connection with the MTP. The MTP is required to include a discussion of types of potential environmental mitigation activities for the transportation improvements and potential locations to carry out these activities, including activities that may have the greatest potential to restore and maintain the environmental functions affected by the Plan.
23 CFR 450.324(c) requires the MPO to review and update the MTP at least every four years in air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas and at least every 5 years in attainment areas to reflect current and forecasted transportation, population, land use, employment, congestion, and economic conditions and trends.
22
89
Under 23 CFR 450.324(f), the MTP is required, at a minimum, to consider the following:
Projected transportation demand Existing and proposed transportation facilities Operational and management strategies Congestion management process Capital investment and strategies to preserve transportation infrastructure and provide for multimodal capacity Design concept and design scope descriptions of proposed transportation facilities Potential environmental mitigation activities Pedestrian walkway and bicycle transportation facilities Transportation and transit enhancements A financial plan
4.5.2 Current Status
LVTS’s LRTP was last adopted in October 2019 as part of a joint two-county regional comprehensive plan and long range transportation update titled FutureLV: The Regional Plan. The MPO provided a copy of the recently adopted FutureLV to the Review Team and the findings below are based on the review of the plan and discussion at the on-site review.
LRTP Development Process
The Lehigh Valley’s transportation network includes 920 bridges and 4,143 linear miles of roadway. The Federal-Aid network in the Lehigh Valley is comprised of over 917 linear miles of roadway with nearly 22% of the network locally-owned (approx. 200 miles). At the on-site review, the Review Team asked the LVPC staff to share information on the process to monitor and evaluate the condition of the locally-owned Federal-Aid system. The LVPC staff did not have a current process in place to monitor performance and plan improvements on locally- owned Federal-Aid roadways. The Review Team recommended that LVPC develop a process to collect data and analyze the conditions and operational functions of this system as part of the next LRTP update. A map highlighting the locally-owned roadways on the Federal-Aid system should be incorporated into the LRTP update. In addition, LVTS MPO should build on its existing
23
90
relationships with local municipalities to educate and advocate for the conditions and needs of the locally-owned Federal-Aid system.
The Review Team also strongly encourages the LVTS to proactively invite PennDOT to participate in the LRTP update process to identify and document PennDOT’s asset management conditions, strategies, and investment priorities for the Lehigh Valley’s approx. 60 miles of Interstates highways. The existing LVTS LRTP does not include any information, analysis, or investments for the region’s Interstate system, and does not identify current and future needs of the transportation system in the region.
Federal regulations require environmental mitigation be set forth in connection with the LRTP. While FutureLV identifies “Protected and Vibrant Environment” as a regional priority, the document does not include an explicit comparison of the transportation plan to existing inventories of natural or historic resources. The Review Team recommends LVTS include a discussion of potential environmental mitigation activities with subsequent LRTP updates. LVTS is encouraged to review the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC) LRTP, SmartMoves for a Changing Region (Appendix VII), as an example.
Performance Based Planning and Programming and Project Prioritization
The planning regulations 23 CFR 450.324(f)(3), (4) require the inclusion of a system performance report in the MTP. The FutureLV (Appendix) includes an adequate system performance report documenting the LVTS actions to support PennDOT’s targets for Safety, Pavement, Bridge, Reliability, and CMAQ emissions. Information is missing on Transit Performance Measures and Targets. LVTS staff recognized the need to include transit targets and measures in any LRTP amendments or the next update to the LRTP
The FutureLV transportation project listing was developed through an open project solicitation process, where LVTS invited municipalities and potential project sponsors to submit candidate transportation projects. The Open Call for Plans and Projects resulted in over 250 candidate project submissions from 62 municipalities.
Transit Asset Management (TAM) Plan Integration
23 CFR 450.306(d)(4) states that “an MPO shall integrate in the metropolitan transportation planning process, directly or by reference, the goals, objectives, performance measures, and targets described in other State transportation plans and transportation processes, as well as any
24
91
plans developed under 49 U.S.C chapter 53 by providers of public transportation, required as part of a performance-based program…” The regulation lists a series of plans that are among those the MPO must integrate into its planning process (23 CFR 450.306(d)(4)(i)-(viii).
The FutureLV system performance report does not include information for transit asset management that documents the performance measures and targets, evaluates past condition and performance, and reports progress achieved in meeting performance targets. LANTA and LVTS are in compliance with the TAM requirements including data sharing agreements, adoption of a TAM plan, and target setting, but this information is missing from the FutureLV document.
Transit Oriented Development
While Transit Oriented Development (TOD) traditionally has occurred centered around major transit stations, it also can be focused around smaller networks where the principles behind it are still prevalent. Development that includes or features a mix of commercial, residential, office and entertainment located near transit creates more connected and vibrant communities. TOD primarily occurs when regional or local governments encourage it through land use planning, and zoning laws. When a TOD coincides with a federally funded transit project, FTA may provide financial assistance, technical assistance, training, and other resources to complement the regional or local TOD. There are examples of TOD projects and goals within the LRTP, though they are not necessarily specifically identified as such.
It is clear both LANTA and LVTS have given thought to opportunities and made efforts to create conversations with developers to potentially pursue TOD projects, but there is concern that the smaller scale of those opportunities does not fit FTA’s funding programs well. FTA encouraged LVTS to contact regional staff at FTA to consult on TOD opportunities and identify smaller funding programs like the Pilot Program for TOD Planning that may fit their needs.
Multimodal Transportation Planning
In 2017, LVTS and LANTA began the update of the Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Plan (Coordinated Plan), and held three public meetings to request input on transportation gaps and strategies to address those gaps. The Coordinated Plan was completed and released in 2018 and outlines clear goals and strategies for improving transit and connectivity in the region. The
25
92
before and after images for suggested action items draw a clear picture of possible strategies to address the gaps and needs identified through the collaborative process.
In December 2019, LVTS published a draft Active Transportation Master Plan titled Walk/Roll LV. This plan seeks to coordinate public transit, trail, sidewalk, bikeway and roadway systems to create a robust and seamless regional transportation network that is safe and convenient, and that supports pedestrian and bicycle transportation. Walk/Roll LV identifies gaps in transit, sidewalk, trail, and ADA accessibility across the region. The draft plan was coordinated across many stakeholder groups and agencies (including LANTA) and included extensive public outreach. The plan includes specific and prioritized project recommendations, an evaluation of funding opportunities, and is integrated within the PennDOT Connects policy framework.
4.5.3 Findings
Commendation:
The Review Team commends LVTS for the readable, graphic/image-focused format of the LRTP. The Review Team commends LVTS and LANTA on the Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Plan. The final product fits the regulatory requirement, LANTA and LVTS chose to go beyond and create a product that that is also easily consumed and accessible to the public. The Review Team commends LVTS for undertaking an “Active Transportation” Master Plan. Walk/Roll LV emphasizes the focus LVTS has placed on multimodal planning and meeting the transportation needs of the entire region.
Recommendations:
The Review Team recommends that LVTS strengthen future LRTP updates by including: o An overview of the Interstate TIP within the Lehigh Valley region; o An analysis of local Federal-aid routes and future needs; o Environmental mitigation strategies; and o Stronger references to the Appendices within the body of the LRTP. The Review Team also strongly encourages the LVTS to proactively invite PennDOT to participate in the LRTP update process to identify and document PennDOT’s asset management conditions, strategies, and investment priorities to adequality maintain the region’s Interstate system.
26
93
4.6 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP)
4.6.1 Regulatory Basis
23 CFR 450.308 sets the requirement that planning activities performed under Titles 23 and 49 U.S.C. be documented in a Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). The MPO, in cooperation with the State and public transportation operator, shall develop a UPWP that includes a discussion of the planning priorities facing the MPA and the work proposed for the next one- or two-year period by major activity and task in sufficient detail to indicate the agency that will perform the work, the schedule for completing the work, the resulting products, the proposed funding, and sources of funds.
4.6.2 Current Status
As part of the TMA Certification Review, FHWA and FTA reviewed the 2018-2020 UPWP. LVTS adopted the 2018-2020 UPWP on March 2, 2018, with a notice to proceed date of June 9, 2018. The UPWP met the requirements of 23 CFR Part 420, Subpart A, which included planning priorities facing the TMA and is sufficient in tracking major activities, tasks and budgets during the horizon of the UPWP document. The UPWP was approved for a final constrained funding amount of $2,011,650.
At the time of the review, LVTS was in the process of developing a new 2020-2022 UPWP. In July 2019, PennDOT released new guidance to MPOs/RPOs to improve the UPWP update process and document quality. This updated guidance also established clear collaboration points for the MPOs/RPOs to work cooperatively with stakeholders, PennDOT and FHWA/FTA. LVTS provided the draft 2020-2022 UPWP document to FHWA and FTA for review on September 19, 2020. The Review Team looked at the draft document and found that it meets the requirements of 23 CFR 450.308 and the PennDOT Planning Priorities UPWP guidance. FHWA and FTA anticipates providing final review and approval of the 2020 UPWP in April 2020.
As part of efforts to strengthen the MPO/RPO work program and invoicing process, PennDOT and FHWA partnered to provide training to sub-recipients on the 2 CFR Part 200 – Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB’s) Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, And Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. 2 CFR 200 requires that if an agency uses federal funds and wishes to charge indirect costs to the federal award, then they must have an Indirect Cost Allocation Plan (ICAP)/Indirect Cost Rate Proposal (ICRP), including a negotiated Indirect Cost
27
94
Rate, approved by the appropriate cognizant agency. Following this training, PennDOT developed the guidance for sub-recipients, Planning Partner Indirect Cost Allocation/Indirect Cost Rate Proposal Reference Guide. This guidance outlines the requirements and establishes a process for all MPOs/RPOs to develop an approved ICAP. During the desktop review, FHWA observed that LVTS did not have an approved ICAP. However, PennDOT and LVTS staff informed the Review Team at the on-site review that efforts were underway to develop the ICAP and the MPO anticipated submitting the ICAP to PennDOT for review in early 2020.
4.6.3 Findings
Commendation:
The Review Team commends LVTS for developing a user-friendly UPWP document that allows for transparency in tracking major activities, tasks and budgets during the 2019 and 2020 state fiscal years.
4.7 Air Quality
4.7.1 Regulatory Basis
The air quality provisions of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401) and the MPO provisions of Titles 23 and 49 require a planning process that integrates air quality and metropolitan transportation planning, such that transportation investments support clean air goals. Under 23 CFR 450.324(m), a conformity determination must be made on any updated or amended transportation plan in accordance with the Clean Air Act and the EPA transportation conformity regulations of 40 CFR Part 93. A conformity determination must also be made on any updated or amended TIP, per 23 CFR 450.326(a).
4.7.2 Current Status
On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23858), EPA designated and classified Lehigh Valley MPO planning area as part of the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). On March 4, 2008 (73 FR 11557), EPA redesignated the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA nonattainment area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA designated Lehigh Valley MPO planning area (Lehigh and Northampton Counties) as part of the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, Pennsylvania (PA)
28
95
nonattainment area (Lehigh, Northampton, and Carbon Counties) for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS on May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30088) with an effective date of July 20, 2012.
On November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), EPA designated Allentown, PA, which consists of Lehigh County and Northampton County, nonattainment for the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS. On April 13, 2015 (80 FR 19548), EPA redesignated Lehigh County, PA and Northampton County, PA to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. LVTS continues to conform to all of the applicable standards.
The conformity determinations to the LVTS FY 2019-2022 TIP and 2045 LRTP were completed in order to demonstrate that mobile source emissions for each analysis year of the long-range plan, adhere to all nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulate matter (PM2.5), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emissions budgets. The conformity determinations were reviewed in accordance with the procedures and criteria of the Transportation Conformity Rule contained in 40 CFR part 93, sections 93.106, 93.108, 93.110, 93.111, 93.112, 93.113(b), and (c), and 93.118.
LVTS reviews regionally significant projects to determine air quality impacts and follows necessary steps to include those projects on the TIP and LRTP. LVTS is also an active participant in the Intergovernmental Coordination Group (ICG) process through its involvement in the Pennsylvania Air Quality Work Group. The Review Team encourages the MPO to continue to make significant contributions to air quality improvement by coordinating with regional partners on emission reduction strategies and developing relevant CMAQ projects in coordination with PennDOT.
4.7.3 Findings
Commendation:
The Review Team commends LVTS for being an active participant in the Pennsylvania Air Quality Work Group. The Review Team commends LVTS for consistently completing past conformity determinations in a timely matter. EPA’s most recent review of the LVTS 2019-2022 TIP and 2045 Long Range Plan met all the CAA requirements to allow approval of the conformity determinations according to relevant regulations.
29
96
Recommendations:
The Review Team recommends LVTS coordinate with PennDOT Central Office to identify training and technical needs as it relates to MOVES modeling software.
4.8 Transportation Safety
4.8.1 Regulatory Basis
23 U.S.C. 134(h)(1)(B) requires MPOs to consider safety as one of ten planning factors. As stated in 23 CFR 450.306(a)(2), the planning process needs to consider and implement projects, strategies, and services that will increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users.
In addition, SAFETEA-LU established a core safety program called the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) (23 U.S.C. 148), which introduced a mandate for states to have Strategic Highway Safety Plans (SHSPs). 23 CFR 450.306 (d) requires the metropolitan transportation planning process should be consistent with the SHSP, and other transit safety and security planning.
4.8.2 Current Status
The Review Team evaluated safety planning efforts underway in the Lehigh Valley region through the LRTP, TIP, and traffic and safety studies. The on-site review focused on several areas for continued improvement: Road Safety Reviews and HSIP project selection.
Road Safety Audit Process
At the on-site review, LVTS staff indicated that HSIP project identification, evaluation, and programming for the TIP was driven by PennDOT with little to no direct involvement from MPO staff. This may be attributable to the limited staff resources at the MPO or to acknowledging the expertise at District 5-0 to address the safety needs of the region. To enhance safety planning and collaboration, the Review Team highly encourages and recommends the LVPC staff and PennDOT District 5-0 partner to raise the importance and awareness of safety planning within the region and at MPO meetings. Improving safety on our nation’s roadways is FHWA’s top priority and the Review Team recommends the MPO take a proactive role in safety planning through full coordination, cooperation, and partnership with District 5-0. Since the early 2000s, the FHWA Pennsylvania Division has placed an emphasis on safety collaboration
30
97
and planning between PennDOT and the MPOs/RPOs across the Commonwealth. FHWA recommends that LVTS partner with District 5-0 to conduct safety reviews to help plan and program future safety projects in the TIP and LRTP.
HSIP Project Selection
As stated above, PennDOT District 5-0 staff led efforts to identify and program the HSIP funded projects for the region’s 2019 TIP. Based on discussion at the on-site review, LVPC staff indicated they do not have an active role in the selection of HSIP projects. The Review Team encouraged LVPC become familiar with PennDOT’s electronic HSIP applications process. Applications are reviewed by the District 5-0 and Central Office representatives. If approved, HSIP funds are used for a project of merit. In conjunction with performing safety reviews, the LVTS can partner with District 5-0 to not only program the region’s HSIP allocation, but also coordinate to submit joint applications for PennDOT’s Statewide HSIP set-a-side program.
4.8.3 Findings
Commendations:
The Review Team commends LVTS for hosting community events to promote bicycle and pedestrian safety as part of the Walk/Roll LV initiative.
Recommendations:
The Review Team recommends that the MPO have a more active role in the HSIP program by partnering with District 5-0 in identifying and submitting HSIP projects; LVTS can facilitate this partnership by conducting an MPO safety review in collaboration with PennDOT, FHWA, FTA, and other local stakeholders.
4.9 Integrating Freight into the Transportation Planning Process
4.9.1 Regulatory Basis
MAP-21 legislation specifically called for the need to address freight movement as part of the transportation planning process (Reference: MAP-21 § 1115-1118; 23 U.S.C. 134 and 23 CFR 450.306 - Metropolitan transportation planning). MAP-21 also included a number of freight provisions to improve the condition and performance of the national network and support investment in freight-related surface transportation projects and programs. The legislation
31
98
reflects that the LRTP process should provide for the consideration and implementation of projects, strategies, and services that address: i) increasing accessibility and mobility of people and freight, and ii) enhancing the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between transportation modes, for people and freight.
The LRTP process for metropolitan areas should include freight planning, which can lead to a number of goals and strategies supporting and promoting multimodal transportation planning and project development in the metropolitan area. For example, a truck density map analysis can assist regional and local transportation decision makers in prioritizing transportation improvements in applicable corridors. System preservation improvements to urban arterials or local collector improvements could be selected to enhance the movement of goods throughout a region.
Freight issues and recommendations can also be incorporated throughout the LRTP. Freight does not need to be considered as a stand-alone topic. Freight is linked to the entire transportation network, and both the public and private sectors have divested much time in dealing with issues respecting economic development impacts, load bearing capacity, congestion and travel reliability, and limited funding to resolve congestion, safety and security.
4.9.2 Current Status
Since 2015, the MPO has taken tremendous steps in establishing, maturing, and implementing freight planning activities. The recent MAP Forum for coordination of transportation planning activities in the Multi-state New York – New Jersey – Connecticut – Pennsylvania Metropolitan Region demonstrates this commitment to ensuring freight planning activities are coordinated in this region where freight development is exploding.
The Review Team commends LVTS for establishing and strengthening their freight program to include the creation of a Freight Advisory Committee, supporting PennDOT with the administration and coordination of the Eastern Freight Summit in 2018, and being responsive to the needs of municipalities experiencing freight growth.
FHWA stands ready to assist LVTS in the various aspects of its freight planning program, and is currently working with LVTS to hold a FHWA Truck Parking Roundtable in the Spring 2020. FHWA developed the Technical Truck Parking Roundtable approach as a tool designed to bring
32
99
regional/local truck parking stakeholders together to identify truck parking issues and needs and produce an Action Plan to move forward.
The truck analysis data below is included to assist the MPO with freight planning efforts in these major corridors. The data includes truck values for the I-78 and US 22 segments in Lehigh and Northampton County and is provided from PennDOT’s most recent HPMS submittal.
Lehigh Valley Truck Value Updates (as of Feb 3, 2020)
Lehigh County Type I-78 US 22 Average from Truck Data (ADTT value) 21.4% 9.0% Average from Daily Vehicle Miles Travelled (calculating the DVMT for the 21.8% 9.4% ADTT - Section length * ADTT) Median from Truck Data (ADTT values from lowest to smallest and finding the 22.3% 8.5% exact middle)
Northampton County Type I-78 US 22 Average from Truck Data (ADTT value) 21.9% 6.6% Average from Daily Vehicle Miles Travelled (calculating the DVMT for the 21.8% 7.5% ADTT - Section length * ADTT) Median from Truck Data (ADTT values from lowest to smallest and finding the 22.4% 5.1% exact middle)
Intermodal connectors are roads that provide access between major intermodal facilities and the other subsystems making up the National Highway System (NHS) (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/intermodal_connectors/). During functional classification updates, MPOs are encouraged to review their highway system
33
100
to determine if major intermodal facilities or roads are eligible for inclusion on NHS, which provides federal-aid funding for those roads.
The MPO currently has two NHS Intermodal Connectors, which are identified below (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/intermodal_connectors/penns ylvania.cfm).
Lehigh Valley NHS Intermodal Connectors (as of Feb 3, 2020)
Connector Connector Facility Type Facility ID Description Length Center is located at Allentown Transfer Intercity 6th & Linden Sts, 2 PA42T Center Bus/Rail Allentown Bethlehem PA 412-Hellertown Rd. Intermodal Truck/Rail Commerce Center Way 0.69 PA43R Transloading Center to I-78
4.9.3 Findings
Commendation:
The Review Team commends LVTS for establishing and strengthening their freight program to include the creation of a freight advisory committee, supporting PennDOT with the administration and coordination of the Eastern Freight Summit in 2018, and being responsive to the needs of municipalities experiencing freight growth.
4.10 Congestion Management Process / Management and Operations
4.10.1 Regulatory Basis
23 CFR 450.322 states “that the transportation planning process in a Transportation Management Area shall address congestion management through a process that provides for safe and effective integrated management and operation of the multimodal transportation system, based on a cooperatively developed and implemented metropolitan-wide strategy, of new and existing transportation facilities eligible for funding under Title 23 U.S.C. and Title 49
34
101
U.S.C. Chapter 53 through the use of travel demand reduction and operational management strategies.”
Specifically, the section mandates, among other things, that a Congestion Management Process (CMP) contain the following elements:
Methods to monitor and evaluate the performance of the transportation system; Definition of congestion management objectives and performance measures; Establishment of a coordinated program for data collection and system performance monitoring; Identification and evaluation of the anticipated performance and expected benefits of strategies; Identification of an implementation schedule and responsibilities for selected strategies; and Implementation of a process for periodic assessment of strategy effectiveness.
Transportation Management Areas are responsible for development and implementation of a CMP.
23 CFR 450.324(f)(5) requires the LRTP/MTP include Management and Operations (M&O) of the transportation network as an integrated, multimodal approach to optimize the performance of the existing transportation infrastructure. Effective M&O strategies include measurable regional operations goals and objectives and specific performance measures to optimize system performance.
4.10.2 Current Status
The Review Team studied the current 2016 LVTS CMP document and determined that the planning product was consistent with regulatory framework outlined in 23 CFR 450.322. The CMP included an assessment of existing levels of congestion, a listing of priority congestion corridors, and a series of traffic congestion mitigation strategies that range from operational improvements to multimodal enhancements. As part of CMP implementation, the CMP offers potential measures for monitoring congestion trends over time and potential indicators for assessing the effectiveness of congestion management projects completed.
The Review Team recommends that LVTS staff continue to work to further enhance the CMP as an important analytical and decision-making tool. Specifically, it is recommended that LVTS improve efforts to analyze implemented congestion management/mitigation measures to
35
102
determine their effectiveness and document the results. The CMP regulations call for an evaluation of strategy effectiveness and while the current LVTS CMP identifies evaluation indicators, the Review Team suggests a stronger focus on data collection and system monitoring to determine whether the CMP strategies were successful.
The Review Team also recommends that LVTS emphasize freight trends and impacts in the next CMP update, given the significant growth in freight-related land development patterns and resulting traffic impacts.
ITS and TSMO Project Planning and Selection
The PennDOT Eastern Regional Transportation Management Center (RTMC) Region is in the process of updating its Regional Operations Plan (ROP). Through the ROP process, the existing ITS and Operations infrastructure, needs, visions, and goals are identified in order to ultimately prioritize future operations-focused projects and performance measures. The ROP is intended to identify regional priorities on all types of roadways. Many different types of funding sources may be used depending on the project location, such as the Interstate TIP, Planning Partner TIPs, and other sources such as Green Light-Go (state funding). These projects might include such things as:
ITS devices (Dynamic Message Signs, Closed-circuit TV (CCTV) cameras) Traffic signal improvements Improvements to traffic incident management and technology-based safety systems Multimodal improvements (bicycle/pedestrian/transit/etc.)
The Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) process will guide this update. PennDOT developed a TSMO Guidebook (Pub 851) Part 1: Planning which describes how to implement the statewide approach to TSMO’s integrated strategies used to optimize the operational performance of existing infrastructure. Though not a new approach, in simplest terms, TSMO is a way to increase reliability and mobility of our roadways and multimodal systems by using a wide-range of strategies rather than adding capacity to manage congestion.
Although there are similarities and overlap between the ROP and CMPs, these processes will need to remain separate since the MPO areas differ, and the ROP may not satisfy all federal requirements for a CMP in TMA regions. LVTS is encouraged to utilize strategies from the ROP for their region as part of the CMP, and align their CMP updates with the ROP update timeline in
36
103
order to allow both documents to feed projects into the LRTP and TIP. The ROPs are envisioned to be updated every four years. The Review Team encourages LVTS to participate as a regional stakeholder for PennDOT’s Engineering District 5-0 coverage area, and align strategies in both the ROP and CMP processes.
4.10.3 Findings
Recommendations:
The Review Team recommends LVTS strengthen future CMP updates by: o Emphasizing freight trends and impacts; and o Analyzing and documenting implemented congestion management/mitigation measures to determine their effectiveness.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The current review found that the metropolitan transportation planning process conducted in the Lehigh Valley urbanized area meets the Federal planning requirements.
As a result of this review, FHWA and FTA are certifying the transportation planning process which is conducted by PennDOT, LVPC and LANTA. There are recommendations in this Report that warrant close attention and follow-up, as well as areas where the TMA is performing very well that are to be commended.
37
104
APPENDIX A – CERTIFICATION REVIEW MEETING AGENDA
38
105
39
106
APPENDIX B – STATUS OF FINDINGS FROM LAST REVIEW
One of the priorities of each Certification Review is assessing how well the TMA has addressed Corrective Actions from the previous review in 2016. This section summarizes progress since the last review in 2016.
Corrective Action #1: LVPC must establish a written agreement that clearly identifies areas of coordination and the division of transportation planning responsibilities among and between the LVTS and NJTPA. This agreement with NJTPA must be established within 12 months of issuance of the final Certification Report.
Disposition: LVTS/LVPC adopted a Memorandum of Understanding with the NJTPA to carry out transportation planning and programming processes in a cooperative and coordinated fashion on May 18, 2016.
Corrective Action #2: The USDOT Review Team finds that LVPC has insufficient methods of administration to ensure program participants and beneficiaries awareness of the protections afforded them by Title VI, related statues and regulations and the applicability of the same to the programs and activities it administers. Accordingly, LVTS must, within 180 days of the Certification Review Report:
a. Conduct an LEP analysis and develop a language access plan that includes appropriate language assistance services for participants and beneficiaries that are limited English proficient. The USDOT Review Team recommends that LVTS follow the process outlined in the DOT LEP Guidance to conduct the analysis. LVTS must provide FHWA and FTA with a copy of its analysis and access plan upon completion of this activity.
b. Ensure the availability and accessibility of the complaint form and process on its website in English and languages other than English as appropriate. Alternatively, LVTS may include a statement on its website, in appropriate language(s) that informs individuals whom to contact if translation services are necessary. LVTS must provide FHWA and FTA proof of posting, including the web address for the post upon completion of this activity.
c. Develop and post a Notice to the Public or Policy Statement that informs beneficiaries of and participants in its programs of their rights under Title VI.
40
107
The Notice or Policy Statement must be displayed on the LVTS website and public areas under LVTS control. The Notice or Policy Statement must be in languages other than English as appropriate or include a statement directing LEP individuals whom to contact for assistance. LVTS must provide FHWA and FTA proof of posting, including the web address for the post upon completion of this activity. Additionally, a list of locations where the statement is posted should be provided.
Disposition: The Review Team determined that LCTCC has made progress to address this Corrective Action; however, there is still improvement needed. Please see Section 4.3 Civil Rights (Title VI and Limited English Proficiency (LEP)) for more information.
41
108 APPENDIX C – PARTICIPANTS
The following participants attended Day 1 of the on-site review on Monday, December 16:
42
The following participants attended Day 2 of the on-site review on Tuesday, December 17:
43
APPENDIX D – PUBLIC COMMENTS
The Review Team held an Open Public Meeting to discuss the transportation planning process in the Lehigh Valley. The meeting was held on:
Open Public Meeting Time: 4:30 p.m. Date: Tuesday, December 17, 2019 Place: Lehigh Valley Planning Commission 961 Marcon Blvd., #310 Allentown, PA 18109
The meeting provided an opportunity for the public, local officials, and stakeholders to share their views on the transportation planning process. The attendee list is provided below. Three members of the public attended the public meeting on Tuesday, December 17. The following participants attended the Open Public Meeting:
44
Welcome and Certification Review Presentation
At 4:30 p.m., Dan Walston, FHWA, welcomed public meeting participants and explained the purpose and components of a joint FTA/FHWA TMA Certification Review. He provided an overview of the certification review process and explained the basics of the MPO transportation planning process. He stated that the Review Team was present at the meeting to get feedback about the Lehigh Valley TMA from the public, and that the Team’s findings and recommendations could be influenced by their comments. He invited attendees to share issues, concerns, accolades, questions, and comments.
Public Comments
Mr. Rick Molchany, Lehigh County, shared comments about his experience as a member of the LVTS Coordinating Committee and working with the MPO staff. Mr. Molchany commented that the MPO is a strong partner with PennDOT, LANTA, and FHWA. He emphasized the need for more transportation funding to address the backlog of system needs within the Lehigh Valley Region.
Adjournment
Dan Walston adjourned the meeting at 5:30 p.m.
45
112
APPENDIX E – LIST OF ACRONYMS
ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act AQ: Air Quality CA: Corrective Action CAA: Clean Air Act CFR: Code of Federal Regulations CMP: Congestion Management Process DOT: Department of Transportation EJ: Environmental Justice FAST: Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act FHWA: Federal Highway Administration FTA: Federal Transit Administration FY: Fiscal Year GIS: Geographic Information Systems HSIP: Highway Safety Improvement Program ISTEA: Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act ITS: Intelligent Transportation Systems LANTA: Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority LVPC: Lehigh Valley Planning Commission LEP: Limited-English-Proficiency LRTP: Long Range Transportation Plan LVTS: Lehigh Valley Transportation Study M&O: Management and Operations MAP-21: Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century MOA: Memorandum of Agreement MOU: Memorandum of Understanding MPA: Metropolitan Planning Area MPO: Metropolitan Planning Organization MTP: Metropolitan Transportation Plan NAAQS: National Ambient Air Quality Standards NHS: National Highway System NO2: Nitrogen Dioxide O3: Ozone PennDOT: Pennsylvania Department of Transportation PM10 and PM2.5: Particulate Matter PPP: Public Participation Plan ROP: Regional Operations Plan RSA: Road Safety Audit SAFETEA-LU: Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
46
113
SHSP: Strategic Highway Safety Plan TAM: Transit Asset Management TAMP: Transportation Asset Management Plan TIP: Transportation Improvement Program TMA: Transportation Management Area TPM: Transportation Performance Measures TSMO: Transportation Systems Management and Operations USC.: United States Code UPWP: Unified Planning Work Program USDOT: United States Department of Transportation
47
114
Report prepared by: FHWA Pennsylvania Division Office 228 Walnut Street, Room 508 Harrisburg, PA 17101 717.221.3461
115 Federal Transit Administration Federal Highway Administration Region III Pennsylvania Division 1835 Market Street, Suite 1910 228 Walnut Street, Room 508 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Harrisburg, PA 17101-1720 (215) 656-7100 (717) 221-3461 (215) 656-7260 (fax) (717) 221-3494 (fax)
In reply refer to: Lehigh Valley TMA Federal Certification Review
June 25, 2020
Mr. Michael Rebert, MPO Chairperson Lehigh Valley Planning Commission 961 Marcon Boulevard – Suite 310 Allentown, PA 18109
Dear Mr. Rebert:
This letter notifies you that the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) jointly certify the planning process in the Lehigh Valley Transportation Management Area (TMA). This certification is based on the findings from the Federal Certification Review conducted on December 16-17, 2019.
We thank the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission staff, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) Program Center staff, the PennDOT District 5-0 staff, and the Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority (LANTA) staff for their cooperation and assistance throughout our review. Enclosed is a report that documents the results. There are twelve (12) Recommendations, and seventeen (17) Commendations. This report has been transmitted concurrently to PennDOT and LANTA. As the final step of the Certification Review process, we offer to present these findings to the Lehigh Valley Transportation Study (LVTS) Coordinating Committee and other Committees, at your discretion.
If you have any questions regarding this determination, please do not hesitate to contact either Ms. Laura Keeley, FTA Community Planner, at (215) 656-7111 or Ms. Jennifer Crobak, FHWA Planning Program Manager, at (717) 221-3440.
Sincerely,
Digitally signed by Digitally signed by THERESA GARCIA CREWS ALICIA E ALICIA E NOLAN Date: 2020.06.25 Date: 2020.06.25 09:05:51 -04'00' NOLAN 14:53:02 -04'00' Terry Garcia Crews Alicia Nolan Regional Administrator Division Administrator FTA Region III FHWA Pennsylvania Division
Enclosures
116 ec: Becky Bradley, Leigh Valley Planning Commission Charles Doyle, Lehigh Valley Planning Commission Tracy Oscavich, Lehigh Valley Planning Commission Brian Hite, Lehigh Valley Planning Commission Owen O’Neil, Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority Brendan Cotter, Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority Larry Shifflet, Deputy Secretary of Planning Brian Hare, PennDOT Program Center Kristin Mulkerin, PennDOT Program Center Ray Green, PennDOT Program Center Dean Roberts, PennDOT Program Center Joshua Bartash, PennDOT Bureau of Equal Opportunity Christopher Kufro, PennDOT District 5-0 Amanda Leindecker, PennDOT District 5-0 Jen Ruth, PennDOT District 5-0 Kathleen Zubrzycki, FTA Region III Laura Keeley, FTA Region III Timothy Lidiak, FTA Region III Keith Lynch, FHWA Pennsylvania Division Spencer Stevens, FHWA Pennsylvania Division Matt Smoker, FHWA Pennsylvania Division Jennifer Crobak, FHWA Pennsylvania Division Jamie Lemon, FHWA Pennsylvania Division Eugene Porochniak, FHWA Pennsylvania Division Sonya Mullins, FHWA Pennsylvania Division Khan Mitchell, FHWA Pennsylvania Division Gregory Becoat, EPA Region 3
117 Road Warrior: COVID-19 changed how we live and work. Regional planners are learning from the Crisis
By: Tom Shortel Morning Call – June 14, 2020
The number of people in bike paths and trails, including the Saucon Rail Trail, seen here have surged in recent months. Planners believe the numbers could remain high moving forward, potentially driving more people to bike or walk to go to work or shop. (Monica Cabrera / The Morning Call)
A lesson I’ve learned in adulthood is that a person’s education doesn’t end when they leave the classroom. When you get a job, you learn about acting in a professional setting. If you enter a healthy relationship, you learn to balance your own needs with a loved one’s. In recent years, I’ve learned that Morning Call interns seem to get younger every year, and that I’m old and out of step with pop culture.
Lessons come in crises, too. As the coronavirus changed our normal behaviors and patterns, it’s created something of a lab setting for regional planners and transportation officials. Scientists have always valued accurate data that breaks from normal results; it provides insights into what we’re studying, whether its human behavior or astrophysics.
I reached out to people who draft transportation policy and community plans in the Lehigh Valley about COVID-19 and the lessons they’re drawing from our response. Here are some of the answers:
Christopher Kufro, PennDOT assistant district executive of design
Kufro oversees design work that goes into some of the Lehigh Valley’s busiest roads. Much of his work is driven by data — looking at growth trends, driver behaviors and then building a road that meets those needs for decades to come. But at this point, it’s
118 unclear if COVID-19 is a short-term blip or something engineers need to keep in mind long term.
“A lot of the traffic data, it’s too soon to get into that. It’s not enough time to really put a good analysis out,” Kufro said.
It gets a little trickier when tackling traffic counts for the region’s highways. PennDOT uses this data to project congestion, which they use to guide their decisions about widening roads, setting regulations for development and long-term planning.
“We try to design for 20 years into the future so when it’s built, you’re not surprised,” he said.
Vehicle numbers were cut in half in March and April and have started to rebound a bit in May and June. With the threat of a long-term recession lingering, it’s unclear how long travel numbers will be depressed. For now, PennDOT is assuming the next few years will see 0% growth of vehicles on the highways.
Becky Bradley, executive director of the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission
Maybe it’s cabin fever. Maybe it’s surging unemployment. Maybe it’s just too dang nice outside.
Whatever the reason, the Lehigh Valley’s paths and trails have seen a surge in usage since Gov. Tom Wolf issued the stay-at-home orders, Bradley said. The number of people on the trails has jumped 60% during the pandemic, according to headcounts by the planning commission, the Ironton Rail Trail and the Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor.
While the usage numbers may not stay this high once gyms reopen, Bradley anticipates some people who got in the habit of using trails over the pandemic will continue to use them. Trails and outdoor recreation have long been popular in the Lehigh Valley, with 61% of survey-takers citing it as their favorite feature of the region in 2018.
But trails shouldn’t just be viewed as recreation. A small percentage of Lehigh Valley workers use them to get to work. If more people decide the trails are a realistic alternative, it could alleviate congestion on local roads.
The Lehigh Valley Planning Commission was thinking about this for years, long before your average person heard of the coronavirus. The goal has been to make more walkable communities, which has a lot of potential benefits. It’s a healthier lifestyle, decreases congestion and can create more inviting downtowns. The costs of adding sidewalks and trails, planting trees to keep them shaded and maintaining the system is also cheaper than continually widening highways.
119 This month, the Lehigh Valley Transportation Study approved its active transportation plan. The document, which was formed after getting feedback from hundreds of Lehigh Valley residents, calls for bolstering bike trails, making more shopping districts accessible to pedestrians and adopting traffic calming tactics in urban areas to make it safer for people on foot, among other strategies.
“Now that there’s a pandemic, it’s really opened our eyes and reinforced that we are on the right path,” Bradley said.
That said, we can’t exactly abandon the highways. People may have been willing to take a day to travel from Easton to Alburtis back in 1900, but it’s not going to fly in 2020. Plus, not everyone is in cycling shape, Pennsylvania winters can be harsh, and people need to travel to other markets.
But the coronavirus has shed light on our highways, too, Bradley said. The commission has found data for what people have noticed anecdotally — traffic is flowing a lot better with the highways empty.
Cellphone data from March showed vehicles flowed freely in westbound traffic on Route 22 between Route 33 and the Northeast Extension during the morning rush hour. Eastbound traffic was almost as good during the same times, with traffic only backing up at Route 309 and Fullerton.
The evening rush hour was uglier but still better, Bradley said. From 4-7 p.m., there was no westbound congestion. Eastbound, there were some chokepoints at the Fullerton, Airport Road and Schoenersville Road interchanges, but traffic still flowed better than normal.
Simon Okumu, the commission’s transportation and economic systems planner, compared the traffic data between February and March. He found that under perfect circumstances, an evening commute that should take 30 minutes on Route 22 lasted almost seven minutes longer in February because of traffic. The same drive in March would have added just three minutes.
So what’s this all mean? The normal traffic jams we encounter on the region’s busiest highway are mostly a result of too many cars on the road rather than an inherent flaw in Route 22 itself, Bradley said. Plans to widen the highway — an effort that is basically on indefinite hold following a funding cut last year — would alleviate the problem, at least in the short term.
Darlene Heller, Bethlehem director of planning and zoning
In the last few months, many businesses have learned the advantages and challenges of working remotely. Heller said some businesses may determine that they’re able to make this a permanent switch, allowing them to cut back on how much office space they pay for.
120
But the consequences of decisions like this have far-reaching consequences. If people aren’t heading into downtowns for work, what does that mean for the companies that serve them? Diners and cafes that relied on employees coming in for lunch are suddenly hard hit.
Retail faces similar challenges. Customers forced to shop online may decide they prefer it, putting new pressure on brick-and-mortar shops. Heller acknowledged these are problems communities across the country may soon wrestle with, but she was optimistic about Bethlehem’s chances to sort through it.
“We have really attractive neighborhoods that surround our downtowns. We don’t have 9-to-5, Monday to Friday downtowns,” she said. “The more diverse an area is, the more sustainable it is, the more resilient it is. I think in that way we’re pretty fortunate.”
Heller said there are too many unknowns at this point to determine how communities will need to change, but she expressed confidence attractive and safe outdoor areas will be key. For years, cities like Austin, Texas, have converted roads into pedestrian only areas, at least during certain hours. Other cities may follow suit with stores and restaurants liming how many people can enter.
“Is there a way we can spill that [crowd] out into public ways so more people can be served and serviced? How do we accommodate them in public spaces?” Heller said.
Morning Call reporter Tom Shortell can be reached at 610-820-6168 or [email protected].
121